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,c6acbb9f2027b8c9
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "REH" <spamjunk@stny.rr.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: volatile vs aliased
Date: 5 Oct 2005 13:20:21 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1128543621.060346.217850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1128525722.605730.281980@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <87mzlnomca.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
   <1128537566.929419.121660@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <874q7voigp.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
   <1128542556.356635.96060@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
   <87zmpnn2qy.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.35.35.34
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1128543625 15882 127.0.0.1 (5 Oct 2005 20:20:25
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:20:25 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <87zmpnn2qy.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=192.35.35.34;
   posting-account=lnUIyw0AAACoRB2fMF2SFTIilm8F10q2
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5426
Date: 2005-10-05T13:20:21-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> I don't understand.  Do you mean to say that one Call_Procedure is not
> sufficient?  That you'd have to have many such procedures?  Why?
I've not sure if you are asking if I need several procedures per
address (I do not) or why I have many address (I do).  Either way, your
way is probably best:  just make one wrapper procedure for each
address.  I was "creating" the procedure from the address at each call
point.  Sigh.  Sometimes the simplest answer eludes me.

Thanks for the great advice.
 REH