Re: Elaboration of nested generic package.

[mheaney@on2.com (Matthew Heaney)]

dlwester@hotmail.com (Don Westermeyer) wrote in message news:<5437fafb.0307071905.5d3bbc4e@posting.google.com>...
> christoph.grein@eurocopter.com wrote in message news:<mailman.0.1057119854.328.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>...
> > 
> > There is no need to put pragma Elaborate_Body into the nested generic, because 
> > the body of Example also holds the body of Nested, and when the body of Example 
> > is elaborated, the body of Nested is inevitably elaborated as well.
> > 
> > What you cite in the style guide applies only to library generic units (or 
> > should that be generic library units :-):
> > http://www.adaic.org/docs/95style/html/sec_8/8-4-3.html

I don't think it matters much what the generic itself says.  Whenever
you instantiate a generic package, you should always Elaborate_All on
the with clause:

with GP;
pragma Elaborate_All (GP);  --you need this

package body Q is
   package P is new GP;
end Q;

See the CLA thread "AQ&S Guidance on pragma Elaborate_Body" which
occurred in 1997/04 -- particularly the responses from Bob Duff and
Robert Dewar.

I forget whether you need the pragma for root-level instantiations:

with GP;
pragma Elaborate_All (GP); --needed?
package P is new GP;

I don't think the pragma inside the generic declaration does very
much, except to indicate to the reader about whether the package uses
named access types, etc.  It's the Elaborate_All pragma that's
important for generics.

Perhaps Bob Duff can, er, elaborate.

-Matt