From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,400766bdbcd86f7c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Per Lindquist" <commander@death-star.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: This can't be done in Ada...or?
Date: 17 Feb 2005 01:47:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1108633634.446310.176400@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
References: <1108139611.709714.36170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
   <2IcPd.6268$mG6.1474@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
   <mailman.139.1108216901.527.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
   <iaxPd.6841$mG6.4148@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
   <1108372232.436036.318690@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <UxbQd.520$IU.22@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
   <1108456053.837461.20340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
   <1bwQd.1171$kU3.57@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 138.14.239.132
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1108633638 20034 127.0.0.1 (17 Feb 2005 09:47:18
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:47:18 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1bwQd.1171$kU3.57@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=138.14.239.132;
   posting-account=e84-wQ0AAADeDLnjH5yWqnRMVsJLfQJg
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8375
Date: 2005-02-17T01:47:14-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Jeffrey Carter wrote:
> It's too late now, but this might have been a good thing to suggest
for
> Ada 0X. Compilers already have to have this information available, or

> PragmARC.Reflection wouldn't work. We should be able to get at it
> without all this overhead.

Seems reasonable.

> Finally, if you only need the name in exceptional circumstances
(error
> logging or the like), I could make Unit_Name a function. Then you'd
only
> have the overhead when you actually use the name.

We have concluded that we probably will log more than just fatal errors
so I think we're stuck with those hardcoded constants after all.

Thanks for your offer anyway. It's a good idea. 

/PerL