From: Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: Allocation of local constant arrays
Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 11:44:28 +0200
Date: 2004-05-21T11:44:28+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1243344.38CSDDicXX@linux1.krischik.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: pan.2004.05.20.19.22.24.392236@nowhere.net
Freejack wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 2004 13:24:07 +0200, Martin Krischik wrote:
>
>>
>> Normally I put them with the procedure. Sometimes I put them in packages
>> inside the procededure:
>>
>> procedure Proc
>> is
>> package Pack
>> ...
>> end Pack;
>> begin
>> ...
>>
>> With Regards
>>
>> Martin
>
>
> Wouldn't that kind of declaration essentially make the variables static
> constants, unchangeable from one call of the procedure to another.
Yes. But beware: if Pack had an evaluation code it would be called with each
call to Proc.
> And
> would I reference the var as Proc.Pack.foobar or just Pack.foobar?
Both can be used.
> Although it looks like this type of definition would help the compiler
> perform optimizations.
That's the idea. Usually I just trust the compiler to do it right.
With Regards
Martin
--
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
http://www.ada.krischik.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-21 9:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-19 15:07 Allocation of local constant arrays Davide
2004-05-19 15:17 ` Davide
2004-05-19 21:16 ` Robert I. Eachus
2004-05-20 9:56 ` Davide
2004-05-20 11:24 ` Martin Krischik
2004-05-20 18:36 ` Freejack
2004-05-21 9:44 ` Martin Krischik [this message]
2004-05-21 2:32 ` Steve
2004-05-21 3:07 ` Robert I. Eachus
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox