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=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HEADER_SPAM, INVALID_DATE,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:4826 comp.compilers:1713 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!att!ima!iecc!compilers-sender From: jb@rti.rti.org (Jeff Bartlett) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.compilers Subject: Re: ADA Compiling Query Summary: call by ref vs copyin-copyout Keywords: Ada Message-ID: <1991Feb13.211643.25777@rti.rti.org> Date: 13 Feb 91 21:16:43 GMT References: <5572@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk> Sender: compilers-sender@iecc.cambridge.ma.us Reply-To: jb@rti.rti.org (Jeff Bartlett) Followup-To: comp.lang.ada Organization: Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC List-Id: In article <5572@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk>, gor@cs.strath.ac.uk (Gordon Russell) writes: > [ does Ada pass arguments by reference or copy in/copy out?] See ANSI/MIL-STD-1815A section 6.2 paragraph 7: .... The language does not define which of these two mechanisms is to be adopted for parameter passing, nor whether different calls to the same subprogram are to use the same mechanism. The execution of a program is erroneous if its effect depends on which mechanism is selected by the implementation. And section 1.6 paragraph 6: (c) Erroneous execution. The language rules specify certain rules to be obeyed by Ada programs, although there is no requirement on Ada compilers to provide either a compilation-time or run-time detection of the violation of such rules. .... The effect of erroneous execution is unpredictable. Jeff Bartlett Center for Digital Systems Research Research Triangle Institute jb@rti.rti.org mcnc!rti!jb (919)-541-6945 -- Send compilers articles to compilers@iecc.cambridge.ma.us or {ima | spdcc | world}!iecc!compilers. Meta-mail to compilers-request.