Re: Only one compilation unit.

[Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <x7vu20gzlxq.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>, Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> writes:
> John English <je@brighton.ac.uk> writes:
> 
>> McDoobie wrote:
>> > 
>> > Alright, I'm writing a small program using two procedures.
>> > 
>> > Now I'm coding both procedures within the same .adb file. When I go to
>> > compile the program I get an error that says "end of file expected, can
>> > only have one compilation unit."
>> > 
>> > Now, that only happens when writing programs with more than one procedure.
>> > 
>> > Do I have to put each different procedure in a seperate text file?
>> 
>> For GNAT, yes.
>> 
>> Simple solution: if you have x.adb containing procedure Main and
>> procedure Sub, run "gnatchop x.adb" which will split the procedures
>> into separate files called main.adb and sub.adb, then run "gnatmake
>> main.adb" which will compile Main and any other units that it
>> depends on (in this case, Sub). Note that Main will need to say
>> "with Sub;" at the top...
> 
> It's probably a good idea to name the file containing your source
> using a file extension other than .adb or .ads (or .adp or .adc, in
> case you take up extended features later). I'd use .ada

What does .adc mean (outside the context of Compaq (nee DEC (nee VAX)) Ada ?

> We had fun when the source was called Foo.ads, under NT one of the
> split files ended up also called Foo.ads -- which overwrote our
> original. Also, GNAT does *not* like files with upper-case letters in
> the name at all!

Even on VMS ?