Determining why an Ada assertion failed - ada

If an assertion fails, I get the following output:
raised SYSTEM.ASSERTIONS.ASSERT_FAILURE : Dynamic_Predicate failed at file.adb:36
Can I get any more details? For example what the input was, or maybe a stack trace, or anything else that might help me in determining why the assertion failed?

You may catch System.Assertions.Assert_Failure to print stack trace using GNAT.Traceback (if you use GNAT) package or print values.
Something like here
pragma Assertion_Policy(CHECK);
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO;
with GNAT.Traceback;
with System.Assertions;
with GNAT.Traceback.Symbolic;
procedure Main is
procedure Call_Stack is
Trace : GNAT.Traceback.Tracebacks_Array (1..1_000);
Length : Natural;
begin
GNAT.Traceback.Call_Chain (Trace, Length);
Put_Line (GNAT.Traceback.Symbolic.Symbolic_Traceback (Trace (1..Length)));
end Call_Stack;
type Day is new String (1 .. 10);
type Message is record
Sent : Day;
Received : Day;
end record with
Dynamic_Predicate => Message.Sent <= Message.Received;
M : Message;
begin
M := (Received => "1776-07-04", Sent => "1783-09-03");
exception
when System.Assertions.Assert_Failure =>
Call_Stack;
Put_Line(String(M.Sent));
Put_Line(String(M.Received));
end Main;
Or you may debug your program as I mentioned in comment

Related

How to get around forbidden discriminants defaults for tagged records in Ada?

I am learning Ada and I've hit a design problem. Excuse me as I'm not up with basic Ada mechanisms and idioms.
Let's say I want to represent an operation. Operators can be either plus or minus and operands can be either integers or strings.
Disclaimer: some things may not make much sense on a semantic level (minus on strings, operators without operands, ...) but it's all about representation.
For now I have the following incorrect code:
operand.ads:
package Operand is
-- I want a None for unary operands or operators without operands
type Operand_Type is (Int, Str, None);
-- This needs to be tagged
type Instance (Op_Type : Operand_Type := None) is tagged record
case Op_Type is
when Int =>
Int_Value : Integer;
when Str =>
Str_Value : String (1 .. 10);
when None =>
null;
end case;
end record;
-- Some methods on operands...
end Operand;
operation.ads:
with Operand;
package Operation is
type Operation_Type is (Plus, Minus);
-- This also needs to be tagged
type Instance is tagged record
Left, Right : Operand.Instance;
end record;
-- Some methods on operations...
end Operation;
main.adb:
with Operand;
with Operation;
procedure Main is
Op : Operation.Instance;
begin
Op.Left := (Op_Type => Operand.Int, Int_Value => 1);
Op.Right := (Op_Type => Operand.Int, Int_Value => 3);
end Main;
When I try to compile I get the following errors:
$ gnatmake main.adb
gcc -c main.adb
operand.ads:7:45: discriminants of nonlimited tagged type cannot have defaults
operation.ads:9:28: unconstrained subtype in component declaration
gnatmake: "main.adb" compilation error
I get why I can't use defaults on tagged type's discriminant but I don't really know how to get around this limitation.
Proposal 1:
Stop using variant records and use a record with one field for each operand. But I feel like this is just throwing away code elegance.
Proposal 2:
Remove defaults from Operand.Instance record and constrain Left and Right from Operation.Instance record. But I get a runtime error :
raised CONSTRAINT_ERROR : main.adb:7 discriminant check failed
As I cannot dynamically change discriminant value of a record's field.
Any help would be much appreciated !
Jim Rogers already discussed using inheritance. You can also use composition if you like by creating an internal non tagged type (which allows defaults), make the Operand.Instance type tagged private, have the private implementation use the internal non tagged version, and just add what operations you need to set and get the operands:
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO;
procedure Hello is
package Operand is
-- I want a None for unary operands or operators without operands
type Operand_Type is (Int, Str, None);
Invalid_Operand : exception;
-- This needs to be tagged
type Instance is tagged private;
function Int_Value(Value : Integer) return Instance;
function Str_Value(Value : String) return Instance;
function Null_Instance return Instance;
function Int_Value(Self : Instance) return Integer;
function Str_Value(Self : Instance) return String;
function Op_Type(Self : Instance) return Operand_Type;
-- Some methods on operands...
private
type Instance_Internal (Op_Type : Operand_Type := None) is record
case Op_Type is
when Int =>
Int_Value : Integer;
when Str =>
Str_Value : String (1 .. 10);
when None =>
null;
end case;
end record;
type Instance is tagged record
Impl : Instance_Internal;
end record;
function Int_Value(Value : Integer) return Instance is (Impl => (Int, Value));
function Str_Value(Value : String) return Instance is (Impl => (Str, Value));
function Null_Instance return Instance is (Impl => (Op_Type => None));
function Int_Value(Self : Instance) return Integer
is (if Self.Impl.Op_Type = Int then Self.Impl.Int_Value else raise Invalid_Operand);
function Str_Value(Self : Instance) return String
is (if Self.Impl.Op_Type = Str then Self.Impl.Str_Value else raise Invalid_Operand);
function Op_Type(Self : Instance) return Operand_Type
is (Self.Impl.Op_Type);
end Operand;
package Operation is
type Operation_Type is (Plus, Minus);
-- This also needs to be tagged
type Instance is tagged record
Left, Right : Operand.Instance;
end record;
-- Some methods on operations...
end Operation;
Op : Operation.Instance;
begin
Put_Line("Hello, world!");
Op.Left := Operand.Int_Value(1);
Op.Right := Operand.Int_Value(3);
Put_Line(Integer'Image(Op.Left.Int_Value));
Put_Line(Integer'Image(Op.Right.Int_Value));
end Hello;
You can break the Operand package into spec and body for better readability, this was just for example.

How do I enforce that a type hold only be a fixed set of non-contiguous values?

I was expecting this program to raise an error when I feed it 3 as a valid Scale value, but no such luck:
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO;
procedure predicate is
type Scale is new Integer
with Dynamic_Predicate => Scale in 1 | 2 | 4 | 8;
GivesWarning : Scale := 3; -- gives warning
begin
Put_Line ("Hello World");
loop
Put_Line ("Gimme a value");
declare
AnyValue : Integer := Integer'Value (Get_Line);
S : Scale := Scale (AnyValue); -- no check done!
begin
Put_Line ("okay, that works" & S'Image);
end;
end loop;
end predicate;
I found this related question, but there the requirement is to use an enum., and the solution is to define an array from enum -> value.
I want something that gives me at least a warning at compile time, and allows me to check at runtime as well, and that raises an error if I try to put an invalid value in. Then, if I can use SPARK to prove that no invalid values can occur, I could turn off said checks. I was under the impression that this was how Static_ / Dynamic_ predicates work, so the example above took me by surprise.
You need to enable assertions. Either compile with -gnata or set an appropriate Assertion_Policy
pragma Assertion_Policy(Dynamic_Predicate => Check);

How to save an Access type of a Discriminant record for later use

Issue:
How do I save an Access Pointer to a discriminant record for use later on in the program?
In main.adb (1) I demonstrate how I was able to get it to compile, but I get a runtime error:
raised PROGRAM_ERROR : main.adb:14 accessibility check failed
Note:
This is small example program based on a much larger/complex codebase.
Constraints:
i. The solution is required to be Ada95 Compatible.
ii. The solution must not change the package specification of Foo.ads as this is existing code that must be used as-is.
foo.ads
with Interfaces;
package Foo is
type Base_Class is abstract tagged limited private;
type Base_Class_Ref is access all Base_Class'Class;
for Base_Class_Ref'Storage_Size use 0;
Max_Count : constant := 6;
type Count_Type is new Interfaces.Unsigned_16 range 1 .. Max_Count;
type Foo_Class (Max : Count_Type) is new Base_Class with private;
type Foo_Class_Ref is access all Foo_Class;
for Foo_Class_Ref'Storage_Size use 0;
--
procedure Initialize (This_Ptr : Access Foo_Class);
--
function Get_Using_Pointer (This_Ptr : in Foo_Class_Ref) return Interfaces.Unsigned_16;
private
type Base_Class is abstract tagged limited null record;
type My_Data_Type is
record
X, Y, Z : Interfaces.Unsigned_16;
end record;
type My_Data_Array is
array (Count_Type range <>) of My_Data_Type;
type Foo_Class (Max : Count_Type) is new Base_Class with
record
Other_Data : Interfaces.Unsigned_16;
Data : My_Data_Array(1 .. Max);
end record;
end Foo;
foo.adb
package body Foo is
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------
procedure Initialize (This_Ptr : Access Foo_Class) is
begin
This_Ptr.Other_Data := 0;
This_Ptr.Data := (others => (0,0,0));
end Initialize;
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------
function Get_Using_Pointer (This_Ptr : in Foo_Class_Ref)
return Interfaces.Unsigned_16 is
begin
return This_Ptr.Other_Data;
end Get_Using_Pointer;
end Foo;
main.adb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
-- Issue:
-- How do I save an Access Pointer for later use (1) to a discriminent record?
--
-- Constraints:
-- i. The solution is required to be Ada95 Compatible.
-- ii. The solution must not change the package specification of Foo.ads
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
with Interfaces;
with Foo;
procedure Main is
Foo_Count : constant := 3;
Foo_Obj : aliased Foo.Foo_Class (Max => Foo_Count);
procedure TEST (This_Ptr : access Foo.Foo_Class) is
-- (1) Save Pointer
-- **** This Line reports: ****
-- raised PROGRAM_ERROR : main.adb:14 accessibility check failed
Foo_Ptr : Foo.Foo_Class_Ref := This_Ptr.all'Access; -- This Compiles...
-- ^^^ I know that this is not correct.
-- But it was the only way I could find to get it to compile.
Data : Interfaces.Unsigned_16;
begin
-- (2) Get Data
Data := Foo.Get_Using_Pointer(This_Ptr => Foo_Ptr); -- This Compiles...
end;
begin
Foo.Initialize(This_Ptr => Foo_Obj'Access);
Test(This_Ptr => Foo_Obj'Access);
end Main;
Quick answer:
Foo_Ptr : Foo.Foo_Class_Ref := This_Ptr.all'Unchecked_Access;
Checked as far as I can with
lockheed:jerunh simon$ gnatmake main.adb -gnat95 -f
gcc -c -gnat95 main.adb
gcc -c -gnat95 foo.adb
gnatbind -x main.ali
gnatlink main.ali
lockheed:jerunh simon$ ./main
lockheed:jerunh simon$
In the line
Foo_Ptr : Foo.Foo_Class_Ref := This_Ptr.all'Access;
replace 'Access with 'Unchecked_Access.
PS. It could cause a dangling references if you destroy the object before Foo_Ptr gone.
The types Base_Class_Ref and Foo_Class_Ref are named access types and variables of this type can only refer to objects either on the heap or on package level, NOT objects on the stack. Since Storage_Size is set to zero it means the heap is out of the question.
package Main_App is
procedure Run;
end Main_App;
package body Main_App is
procedure TEST (This_Ptr : access Foo.Foo_Class) is
-- (1) Save Pointer
-- **** This Line reports: ****
-- raised PROGRAM_ERROR : main.adb:14 accessibility check failed
Foo_Ptr : Foo.Foo_Class_Ref := This_Ptr.all'Access; -- This Compiles...
-- ^^^ I know that this is not correct.
-- But it was the only way I could find to get it to compile.
Data : Interfaces.Unsigned_16;
begin
-- (2) Get Data
Data := Foo.Get_Using_Pointer(This_Ptr => Foo_Ptr); -- This Compiles...
end TEST;
Foo_Count : constant := 3;
Foo_Obj : aliased Foo.Foo_Class (Max => Foo_Count);
procedure Run is
begin
Foo.Initialize (This_Ptr => Foo_Obj'Access);
TEST (This_Ptr => Foo_Obj'Access);
end Run;
end Main_App;
with Main_App;
procedure Main is
begin
Main_App.Run;
end Main;
I hope this solution applicable to your use-case since it avoids usage of Unchecked_Access.
Ok what you're dealing with here is an anonymous access type, from the signature procedure TEST (This_Ptr : access Foo.Foo_Class). The error is telling you that this particular subprogram is in a deeper nesting than the thing it's pointing to: IOW, it could give you a dangling reference.
The proper solution, staying strictly in Ada95 would be to (A) put the TEST subprogram in the library unit [IIRC; 95 and 2005 are so similar they blur together]; or (B) put use a generic.
For a generic, IIRC, you can do this:
Generic
Object : Aliased Foo_Class'Class; -- Might not need 'Class.
with Function Operation(This_Ptr : in Foo_Class_Ref) return Interfaces.Unsigned_16;
Procedure Execute;
--...
Procedure Execute is
Result : Interfaces.Unsigned_16;
Begin
Result:= Operation( Object'Access );
End Execute;
----------------------------------------
O : Aliased Foo.Foo_Class(3);
Procedure TEST is new Foo.Execute( Operation => Foo.Get_Using_Pointer, Object => O );
This might require a little fiddling for your application, but if you put the generic inside Foo.ads/Foo.adb`, it should work. [IIRC] Aside from this, your best bet is to move your aliased object outside your main subprogram's declaration area, then it should work.

Ada functions, accessing stack

Very new with Ada, this is my first time coding with it. Very lost. Any tips, and direction would be great.
Ada question:
I am trying to make: the function Top (S : Stack) return Item_Type, which returns the top item on the stack or raises the Underflow exception, to the generic unbounded stack package.
The function I added for this is at the bottom of this code block.
Current errors:
invalid use of subtype mark in expression or call
actual for "From" must be a variable
invalid use of subtype mark in expression or call
package body Unbound_Stack is
type Cell is record
Item : Item_Type;
Next : Stack;
end record;
procedure Push (Item : in Item_Type; Onto : in out Stack) is
begin
Onto := new Cell'(Item => Item, Next => Onto); -- '
end Push;
procedure Pop (Item : out Item_Type; From : in out Stack) is
begin
if Is_Empty(From) then
raise Underflow;
else
Item := From.Item;
From := From.Next;
end if;
end Pop;
function Is_Empty (S : Stack) return Boolean is
begin
return S = null;
end Is_Empty;
--added this code, and then had errors!
function Top (S : Stack) return Item_Type is
begin
--Raise the underflow
if Is_Empty(S) then
raise Underflow;
else
--or return top item from the stack, call pop
Pop (Item_Type, from => S);--I think I should pull from the stack w/pop
end if;
return Item_Type;
end Top;
end Unbound_Stack;
You're passing in a type (Item_Type) into Pop. Instead you need to declare a variable of type Item_Type and use that.
e.g.
function Top (S : Stack) return Item_Type is
Popped_Item : Item_Type;
begin
...
and then the call to Pop becomes:
Pop (Item => Popped_Item, From => S)
You have two error messages referring to this line:
Pop (Item_Type, from => S);--I think I should pull from the stack w/pop
The first one is pointing at Item_Type and says "invalid use of subtype mark in expression or call".
This means that you are using the name of a type in a place where that isn't allowed. Actual parameters to subprograms can never be types. You need to use (depending on the parameter direction) a variable or an expression for the actual parameter.

Unchecked Conversion for different array length

I am having a constraint error on the following situation:
Get constrained buffer from procedure:
Get_MyBuffer(data => Buffer); -- This is ok
Buffer is of type Unsigned_Byte. Want to convert it to Byte.
function To_Byte is new Unchecked_Conversion (Source => Unsigned_Byte,
Target => Byte);
MyFunction2Pass(To_Byte(Buffer)); -- Having warning 'uncheked conversion to unconstrained array subtype is not portable.
Printing inside MyFunction2Pass
function MyFunction2Pass(Data : Byte) is
begin
New_Line(integer'image(integer(Data(1)))); -- **Shoot Constrain Error**
end
That one line of yours is doing an awful lot. There's nothing wrong with that, but it is temporarily inconvienent while you are getting this exception. You might consider splitting each routine call into its own line for now, just so you can track down which call is putting out the constraint error.
Bit : constant boolean := Data(1); -- I'm guessing this is the right type
Bit_Int : constant integer := integer(Bit);
Bit_Img : constant string := integer'image(Bit_Int);
begin
New_Line (Bit_Img);
end
Now which line is giving the constraint error? (After cleaning up any compiler errors of course).

Resources