Routine Is_Access_Variable, which relied on the Ekind of the type,
wrongly returned True for subtypes of an access-to-subprogram type. It
is more reliable to also use Directly_Designated_Type.
This only affects SPARK legality checks for Global and Depends
contracts; compilation is not affected, because it doesn't rely on the
modified routine.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
gcc/ada/
* sem_prag.adb: Fix typos in comments related to access types.
* sem_util.adb (Is_Access_Variable): Stronger condition.diff --git a/gcc/ada/sem_prag.adb b/gcc/ada/sem_prag.adb
--- a/gcc/ada/sem_prag.adb
+++ b/gcc/ada/sem_prag.adb
@@ -2464,7 +2464,7 @@ package body Sem_Prag is
if Global_Mode in Name_In_Out | Name_Output then
- -- Constant of a access-to-variable type is a read-write
+ -- Constant of an access-to-variable type is a read-write
-- item in procedures, generic procedures, protected
-- entries and tasks.
@@ -13431,7 +13431,7 @@ package body Sem_Prag is
Arg1);
end if;
- -- Only other possibility is Access-to-class-wide type
+ -- Only other possibility is access-to-class-wide type
elsif Is_Access_Type (Nm)
and then Is_Class_Wide_Type (Designated_Type (Nm))
diff --git a/gcc/ada/sem_util.adb b/gcc/ada/sem_util.adb
--- a/gcc/ada/sem_util.adb
+++ b/gcc/ada/sem_util.adb
@@ -15386,8 +15386,9 @@ package body Sem_Util is
function Is_Access_Variable (E : Entity_Id) return Boolean is
begin
- return Is_Access_Object_Type (E)
- and then not Is_Access_Constant (E);
+ return Is_Access_Type (E)
+ and then not Is_Access_Constant (E)
+ and then Ekind (Directly_Designated_Type (E)) /= E_Subprogram_Type;
end Is_Access_Variable;
-----------------------------
