This patch corrects an error in the compiler whereby a function call in
prefix notation within a class condition causes a spurious error
claiming the name in the call is a non-callable entity when there exists
a type extension in the same unit extended with a component featuring
the same name as the function in question.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
gcc/ada/
* sem_ch4.adb (Analyze_Selected_Component): Add condition to
avoid interpreting derived type components as candidates for
selected components in preanalysis of inherited class
conditions.diff --git a/gcc/ada/sem_ch4.adb b/gcc/ada/sem_ch4.adb
--- a/gcc/ada/sem_ch4.adb
+++ b/gcc/ada/sem_ch4.adb
@@ -5158,11 +5158,26 @@ package body Sem_Ch4 is
elsif Is_Record_Type (Prefix_Type) then
- -- Find component with given name. In an instance, if the node is
- -- known as a prefixed call, do not examine components whose
- -- visibility may be accidental.
+ -- Find a component with the given name. If the node is a prefixed
+ -- call, do not examine components whose visibility may be
+ -- accidental.
- while Present (Comp) and then not Is_Prefixed_Call (N) loop
+ while Present (Comp)
+ and then not Is_Prefixed_Call (N)
+
+ -- When the selector has been resolved to a function then we may be
+ -- looking at a prefixed call which has been preanalyzed already as
+ -- part of a class condition. In such cases it is possible for a
+ -- derived type to declare a component which has the same name as
+ -- a primitive used in a parent's class condition.
+
+ -- Avoid seeing components as possible interpretations of the
+ -- selected component when this is true.
+
+ and then not (Inside_Class_Condition_Preanalysis
+ and then Present (Entity (Sel))
+ and then Ekind (Entity (Sel)) = E_Function)
+ loop
if Chars (Comp) = Chars (Sel)
and then Is_Visible_Component (Comp, N)
then
