https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94419
--- Comment #2 from Uriy <yyelle at rbx dot email> --- Thank you for reply. Recently I test gcc 9.3.0 and it report some errors in the example code. But I modify it slightly and it works with no errors. I think the code is enough clear to see what exact clauses RM are violated. For example there is conversion from access to constrained to access to unconstrained type, and the type have a constrained partial view, while legality rules for conversions requires for such case that any partial view were unconstrained. There is also assignments of different subtypes (which have no common values). It is very sad if compiler makers doesn't understand Ada enough to see what exact is wrong in this specially example code. And "thousands tests" will really not help. But I apologise and send corrected code which works against (currently recent) gcc 9.3.0. > you can certainly write your own Ada compiler with another implementation. Yes. But it seems to me that it was more important to say this to you (because gcc, not my compiler, currently does not provide discussed feature of Ada language.) In principle it seems to
