This patch inproves the error report produced on a selected component Nam.Comp
which appears in an object declaration, when Nam has seeveral interpretations
as a function, and there is non-visible package with the same name.
Compiling pqi.adb must yield:
pqi.adb:15:07: no legal interpretations as function call,
pqi.adb:15:07: package "Map" is not visible
---
with Map;
with Gtk_Widget; use Gtk_Widget;
procedure PQI is
type Main_Window_Record_T is new Gtk_Widget.Gobject_Record with
record
Ii : Integer;
end record;
procedure Map (Truc : Boolean) is
begin
null;
end;
X : Map.T;
begin
null;
end;
---
package body Gtk_Widget is
procedure Map (Jjj : Integer) is
begin
null;
end;
end Gtk_Widget;
---
package Gtk_Widget is
procedure Map (Jjj : Integer);
type GObject_Record is tagged private;
type GObject is access all GObject_Record'Class;
procedure Map (Widget : not null access Gobject_Record);
private
type GObject_Record is tagged record
I : Integer;
end record;
end Gtk_Widget;
---
package Map is
type T is new Integer;
end Map;
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2017-01-19 Ed Schonberg <schonb...@adacore.com>
* sem_ch4.adb (Diagnose_Call): Improve error message when a
selected component has a prefix that might be interpreted
as a parameterless function call, but none of the candidate
interpretations is parameterless, and there is a hidden homonym
of the prefix that is a package.
* sem_ch8.adb (Find_Selected_Component): If the prefix might be
interpreted as a parameterless function call and its analysis
fails, do not call Analyze_Selected_Component.
Index: sem_ch4.adb
===================================================================
--- sem_ch4.adb (revision 244612)
+++ sem_ch4.adb (working copy)
@@ -5881,6 +5881,38 @@
end loop;
end if;
+ -- Before listing the possible candidates, check whether this
+ -- a prefix of a selected component that has been rewritten as
+ -- a parameterless function call because there is a callable
+ -- candidate interpretation. If there is a hidden package in
+ -- the list of homonyms of the function name (bad programming
+ -- style in any case) suggest that this is the intended entity.
+
+ if No (Parameter_Associations (N))
+ and then Nkind (Parent (N)) = N_Selected_Component
+ and then Nkind (Parent (Parent (N))) in N_Declaration
+ and then Is_Overloaded (Nam)
+ then
+ declare
+ Ent : Entity_Id;
+
+ begin
+ Ent := Current_Entity (Nam);
+ while Present (Ent) loop
+ if Ekind (Ent) = E_Package then
+ Error_Msg_N
+ ("no legal interpretations as function call,!", Nam);
+ Error_Msg_NE ("\package& is not visible", N, Ent);
+ Rewrite (Parent (N),
+ New_Occurrence_Of (Any_Type, Sloc (N)));
+ return;
+ end if;
+
+ Ent := Homonym (Ent);
+ end loop;
+ end;
+ end if;
+
-- Analyze each candidate call again, with full error reporting
-- for each.
Index: sem_ch8.adb
===================================================================
--- sem_ch8.adb (revision 244612)
+++ sem_ch8.adb (working copy)
@@ -7048,7 +7048,18 @@
-- Now analyze the reformatted node
Analyze_Call (P);
- Analyze_Selected_Component (N);
+
+ -- If the prefix is illegal after this transformation,
+ -- there may be visibility errors on the prefix. The
+ -- safest is to treat the selected component as an error.
+
+ if Error_Posted (P) then
+ Set_Etype (N, Any_Type);
+ return;
+
+ else
+ Analyze_Selected_Component (N);
+ end if;
end if;
end if;
