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: 103376,489d583d6ad4bb9d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Tucker Taft Subject: Re: LNK2005 error in ObjectAda compiler Date: 1999/06/24 Message-ID: <37723F72.9E7FD0A6@averstar.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 493380251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com (USENET news) X-Nntp-Posting-Host: houdini.burl.averstar.com References: <7kr499$cfi$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <930161697.632.27@news.remarQ.com> <7kss9v$uj$1@nnrp1.deja.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: AverStar (formerly Intermetrics) Burlington, MA USA Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-06-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dommo1234@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <930161697.632.27@news.remarQ.com>, > "Vladimir Olensky" wrote: > > This is the exactly the same bug that I described here on 21.06.99 > providing > > piece of assembler code. > > Look at my post "OA bug ?" and Tucker Taft response to it with all > info > > about that bug. > > > > Regards, > > Vladimir Olensky > > > > dommo1234@my-deja.com wrote in message <7kr499 > $cfi$1@nnrp1.deja.com>... > > >All, > > > > > >I'm using ObjectAda V7.1.105 (special edition), and have come up > against > > >a rather strange error at build time. The error is :- > > > > > >error LNK2005: xxxxx.yyyyyy__acc_cleanup already defined in xxxxx.obj > > >fatal error LNK1169: one or more multiply defined symbols found > > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm, in his response to the post "OA bug ?", Tucker says that the > problem only occurs when the Controlled type is not fully defined > before the two access types. This is not the case in my example > however, so I wonder if this is not the same bug. It is the same bug. I probably should have made mention of "freezing point" rather than "fully defined." A tagged type is not considered "fully defined" in this context until overridings of its primitive subprograms have occurred. Hence, if you move the declarations of Initialize, Adjust, and Finalize up in front of the access type declarations, it should not end up with multiple definitions. > ... > Rgds, > Dom. -- -Tucker Taft stt@averstar.com http://www.averstar.com/~stt/ Technical Director, Distributed IT Solutions (www.averstar.com/tools) AverStar (formerly Intermetrics, Inc.) Burlington, MA USA