Hi Arno,
I have added the required “Signed-off-by” tag to the patch and to the change
log entry below. I believe for all other aspects I have followed the
instructions. For getting the patch applied it states "If you do not have write
access and a patch of yours has been approved, but not committed, please advise
the approver of that fact.” So I think I have done that correctly.. However let
me know if there is someone else not included in the CC that should be handling
that.
Of course, I’d love to work towards one day getting write access myself, but
something tells me that’s a bit of a process.
-- Begin change log entry --
ada: Private extensions with the keyword “synchronized” are always limited.
GNAT was relying on synchronized private type extensions deriving from a
concurrent interface to determine its limitedness. This does not cover the case
where such an extension derives a limited interface. RM-7.6(6/2) makes is clear
that “synchronized” in a private extension implies the derived type is limited.
GNAT should explicitly check for the presence of “synchronized” in a private
extension declaration, and it should have the same effect as the presence of
“limited”.
gcc/ada/
* sem_ch3.adb (Build_Derived_Record_Type): Treat presence of
keyword “synchronized” the same as “limited” when determining if a private
extension is limited.
Signed-off-by: Richard Wai <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
-- End change log entry --
Thanks,
Richard

> On Sep 13, 2023, at 03:54, Arnaud Charlet <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> No worries, and sorry for the trouble. I’m going to try using a different
>> client for the gcc mailing list, it doesn’t seem to like Outlook. Thanks for
>> catching that mistake!
>>
>> Please advise how I can get this patch actually applied, given my lack of
>> commit privilege.
>
> You first need to follow instructions from https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
> and in particular meet the legal requirements.
>
> Then get someone with write approval to commit the change.
>
> Arno
