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,e1f05860a49d6f4e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: David Botton <David@Botton.com>
Subject: Re: Preprocessing Ada
Date: 1999/05/25
Message-ID: <374B5C62.6D38D0D0@Botton.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 482150562
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <374B3689.33FF57B4@aasaa.ofe.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: abuse@gate.net
X-Trace: news.gate.net 927685735 10298 199.227.148.84 (26 May 1999 02:28:55
 GMT)
Organization: CyberGate, Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 May 1999 02:28:55 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-05-26T02:28:55+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Use of pragma Inline and/or gnatprep.

David Botton


David Starner wrote:
> 
> I'm writing a library in Ada and I've hit a couple things where I would
> use #ifdef's in C. I would like to offer alternate algorithims for the
> same function that can be chosen at compile time. I would also like to
> add an expensive verification call to the front of each function that
> can be turned on and off at compile time (expensive enough that I want
> it to be seperate from Pragma Assert.)
> 
> 1. Is there a more 'Ada'-like way to do this?
> 
> 2. Will cpp (the C pre-processor) work cleanly with Ada?
> 
> 3. Is there a DFSG-free preprocessor for Ada? (I hate to go this way,
> because that means that everyone who compiles the program needs a
> special preprocessor.)