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,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,91cc2b2a631886b8,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Tory Patnoe <tory.l.patnoe@lmco.com>
Subject: Generic Packages
Date: 1998/08/10
Message-ID: <35CF1129.4DCB0B15@lmco.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 379970869
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: Lockheed Martin
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-08-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Here is a quick question which I was unable to find the answer to in the Ada95 Reference Manual.

I have a program which takes a long time to elaborate.  I am suspecting it has something to do with the generic integer_io.  The
current program (not my design!) looks something like this...

package process1 is
    yada-yada-yada;
    package int_io is new integer_io; use int_io;
end process1;

package process2 is
    more yada-yada-yada;
    package int_io is new integer_io; use int_io;
end process2;

Does the compiler make TWO separate instantiations of int_io in this case?   It would, therefore, make my code larger and take more
time at elaboration?  I suspect this is the case and consequently it would be better to do something like this.

package int_io is new integer_io; use int_io;

with int_io; use int_io;
package process1 is
    yada-yada-yada;
end process1;

with int_io; use int_io;
package process2 is
    more yada-yada-yada;
end process2;

Thanks

Tory