!standard 4.3.2(8)                                            11-11-13  AI05-0282-1/02
!class binding interpretation 11-11-08
!status work item 11-11-08
!status received 11-09-26
!priority Low
!difficulty Easy
!qualifier Omission
!subject Bad ancestor constraints for extension aggregates

!summary

** TBD.

!question

4.3.2(8) does not seem to apply if the ancestor is constrained.

Consider:

   procedure Foo is
      type Root (D : natural) is tagged record
         F1 : String (1 .. D) := (others => 'x');
      end record;
 
      subtype S1 is Root (1);
      subtype S2 is Root (2);
 
      type Ext is new S1 with record F2 : Integer; end record;
  
      Var : Ext := (S2 with F2 => 123);
   begin
      null;
   end Foo;
 
One would hope that this would raise Constraint_Error, but nothing seems to
have that effect.

!recommendation

** TBD.

!wording

In 4.3.2(7), replace:
   are initialized by default as for an object of the ancestor type.
with
   are initialized by default as for an object of the subtype denoted
   by the subtype_mark.

and append a new paragraph:

   If the type of the ancestor_part has discriminants and the
   ancestor_part is a subtype_mark that denotes an unconstrained
   subtype, each discriminant of the ancestor type
   has the value specified for a corresponding discriminant, either in
   the record_component_association_list, or in the
   derived_type_definition or some ancestor of the type of
   the extension_aggregate.

Replace 4.3.2(8):
  If the type of the ancestor_part has discriminants that are not
  inherited by the type of the extension_aggregate, then, unless the
  ancestor_part is a subtype_mark that denotes an unconstrained subtype,
  a check is made that each discriminant of the ancestor has the value
  specified for a corresponding discriminant, either in the
  record_component_association_list, or in the derived_type_definition
  for some ancestor of the type of the extension_aggregate.
  Constraint_Error is raised if this check fails.

With:

  If the type of the ancestor_part has discriminants and the
  ancestor_part is not a subtype_mark that denotes an unconstrained
  subtype, then a check is made that each discriminant of the ancestor
  has the value specified for a corresponding  discriminant, either
  in the record_component_association_list, or in the
  derived_type_definition for some ancestor of the type of
  the extension_aggregate. Constraint_Error is raised if this check
  fails.

!discussion

In order to help understand this wording, I think it helps to realize that
if the ancestor type of an extension aggregate has discriminants, then there
are 6 cases to consider: the cross-product of whether the discriminants of
the ancestor type are inherited by the type of the extension aggregate (yes
or no) and the three possible forms of the ancestor part:
    an expression
    a subtype mark denoting a constrained subtype
    a subtype mark denoting an unconstrained subtype.

!ACATS Test

!ASIS

!appendix

From: Steve Baird
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011  5:28 PM

The following example obviously should raise Constraint_Error
(assuming that it is not rejected at compile time - one could 
imagine adding some sort of "statically matching subtype"
legality rule, but that seems outside the scope of this discussion):
 
   procedure Foo is
      type Root (D : natural) is tagged record
         F1 : String (1 .. D) := (others => 'x');
      end record;
 
      subtype S1 is Root (1);
      subtype S2 is Root (2);
 
      type Ext is new S1 with record F2 : Integer; end record;
  
      Var : Ext := (S2 with F2 => 123);
   begin
      null;
   end Foo;
 
It seems that the present RM wording fails to capture this intent.
 
Note that 4.3.2(8) does not apply because it begins with
    "If the type of the ancestor_part has discriminants that are not
     inherited by the type of the extension_aggregate, ..."

Perhaps this condition needs to be expanded to include the case of 
inherited discriminants and a constrained ancestor subtype_mark.

****************************************************************

From: Steve Baird
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011  1:02 AM

Wording to discuss on Sunday.

====

In 4.3.2(7), replace:
   are initialized by default as for an object of the ancestor type.
with
   are initialized by default as for an object of the subtype denoted
   by the subtype_mark.

and append a new paragraph:

   If the type of the ancestor_part has discriminants and the
   ancestor_part is a subtype_mark that denotes an unconstrained
   subtype, each discriminant of the ancestor type
   has the value specified for a corresponding discriminant, either in
   the record_component_association_list, or in the
   derived_type_definition or some ancestor of the type of
   the extension_aggregate.

Replace 4.3.2(8):
  If the type of the ancestor_part has discriminants that are not
  inherited by the type of the extension_aggregate, then, unless the
  ancestor_part is a subtype_mark that denotes an unconstrained subtype,
  a check is made that each discriminant of the ancestor has the value
  specified for a corresponding discriminant, either in the
  record_component_association_list, or in the derived_type_definition
  for some ancestor of the type of the extension_aggregate.
  Constraint_Error is raised if this check fails.

With:

  If the type of the ancestor_part has discriminants and the
  ancestor_part is not a subtype_mark that denotes an unconstrained
  subtype, then a check is made that each discriminant of the ancestor
  has the value specified for a corresponding  discriminant, either
  in the record_component_association_list, or in the
  derived_type_definition for some ancestor of the type of
  the extension_aggregate. Constraint_Error is raised if this check
  fails.

====

In order to help understand this wording, I think it helps to realize that
if the ancestor type of an extension aggregate has discriminants, then there
are 6 cases to consider: the cross-product of whether the discriminants of
the ancestor type are inherited by the type of the extension aggregate (yes
or no) and the three possible forms of the ancestor part:
    an expression
    a subtype mark denoting a constrained subtype
    a subtype mark denoting an unconstrained subtype.

****************************************************************