Re: GNAT 3.09 vs 3.10 on Linux

["bklungle" <bklungle@ix.netcom.com>]

David, I agree with everything you said. However it was not an elaboration
dependency, just a visibility trace from a body to the same body via specs
withed by bodies. I did a check and there was no actual circularity. I will
have to reinstall 3.10 to get the actual message.

I'm not sure the compilation time is due to more checking (the release says
i386), but maybe.

bob

David C. Hoos, Sr. <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com> wrote in article
<01bcc74e$3e6febb0$4e8371a5@dhoossr>...
> To follow on my previous message:
> 
> Yes, and while I like fast compilation, too, I'll take slower compiles
that
> save debugging time
> any day of the week.  Besides, gnat's compilation model is so superior to
> that of the Ada83
> compilers with which we had to contend for so long, I don't complain at
all
> about compilation
> speed.
> 
> Indidentally, the ability to eliminate recompilation for files which are
> changed, but without
> semantic modificaton -- e.g., adding comments -- by using the -m switch
on
> gnatmake is
> really nice.
> 
> David C. Hoos, Sr.,
> david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com
> 
> bklungle <bklungle@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
> <01bcc6cc$c839f200$8dfd1fcc@p5120>...
> > I have been using 3.09 for the last 6 months on a system (about 22_000
> > lines). Compiles on Verdix also. On the 12th of Sep, I downloaded 3.10
> and
> > installed it. The compilation phase took over twice as long as 3.09,
and
> it
> > claimed there were circular package dependencies which no other
compiler
> > mentioned. I traced them by hand and it seems to think any body
arrivable
> > at more than once by tracing across specs and bodies is circular. This
> > trace appears to be wrong. It refuses to continue. I reinstalled 3.09
and
> > all is now well. Anybody seen similar??
> > 
> > bob
> > 
>