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=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	PLING_QUERY,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3c37d6ac44550e08
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Mats Weber <Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch>
Subject: Re: ??? Help!: how to do unconstraned arrays/records???
Date: 1998/11/06
Message-ID: <36430C81.F9D3A26E@elca-matrix.ch>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 409039119
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3641FDA2.812D683B@avionics2.robins.af.mil>
 <F1yvA7.E30.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: ELCA Matrix SA
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-11-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Tucker Taft wrote:

>    Number_Of_Hosts : constant Natural := Parameters.Get_Host_Count(...);
>    Number_Of_Nodes : constant Natural := Parameters.Get_Node_Count(...);
> 
> [...]
> 
> In the above example, you would certainly want a
> "pragma Elaborate(Parameters);" after the "with Parameters;" clause
> on the package with this host/node data structure, to minimize the
> chance of a Program_Error due to an elaboration order problem.

Probably "pragma Elaborate_All(Parameters);" would be safer, in case
Parameters depends on stuff that needs to be elaborated. Almost all uses
of pragma Elaborate should be replaced by Elaborate_All, I think.