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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,edb9cd4fb1b29f31 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!u3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: No_Implicit_Heap_Allocations Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 07:49:33 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <185be3a1-ac6a-4def-bfca-a45916c0865a@u3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com> References: <0b92849a-7719-45f5-a6bb-568be824a414@k17g2000pre.googlegroups.com> <72385e60-87d6-46a3-8051-73761fee9039@k12g2000vbg.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.138.182.236 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1296143373 27991 127.0.0.1 (27 Jan 2011 15:49:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:49:33 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: u3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.138.182.236; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.10) Gecko/20100914 Firefox/3.6.10,gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:17709 Date: 2011-01-27T07:49:33-08:00 List-Id: On Jan 27, 12:06=A0pm, Mark Lorenzen wrote: > Add pragma Restrictions (No_Implicit_Heap_Allocations) the > specification of P and it will build. That is true, but it still looks like a compiler bug to me. I should not add all possible Restrictions to my library units just in case any of them will be some day used in a program that imposes any of these restrictions, right?. This check should be done automagically and in fact different versions of GNAT behave differently in this regard. -- Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com