Re: The Dreaded "Missing Subunits"

[Peter Amey <peter.amey@praxis-cs.co.uk>]

Peter Richtmyer wrote:
> 
> I love the Gnat compiler but...
> 
>    I dread this error message:
> 
>    "No code generated for file xxxx.2.ada (missing subunits)"
> 
> It means that I have a procedure or function declared "...is separate;"
> in package xxxx, but there is no matching separate. A "legacy" package
> has a gazillion separates. They need changes, and the calling
> parameters get changed and don't match, or the routine name changes,
> or the separate filename isn't right, or whatever happens to get this
> message, and it is a real pain to figure out which "subunit" is missing.
> 
> Anybody have a solution? maybe a compile switch or ...?
> 

Are you really using the GNAT compiler with Rational naming
conventions?  I don't know if that is the cause of your problem but it
certainly won't help.  Rational (rather bizarrely in my view) use
xxx.1.ada for specs and xxx.2.ada for bodies.  The GNAT convention
(which automates builds) is to use:

unit_name.ads for specs, unit_name.adb for bodies and
grandparent-parent-unit_name.adb for subunits.

Hope this helps.

Peter