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,cc4a1f5e11494cc9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) Subject: Re: GNAT and subunits Date: 1995/04/01 Message-ID: <3lkepu$o@felix.seas.gwu.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 100649462 references: <3la3fj$d7m@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> organization: George Washington University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1995-04-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Tucker Taft wrote: >Robert Dewar (dewar@cs.nyu.edu) wrote: >: 1. If a parent unit is compiled with subunits missing, then revert >: automatically to -gnatc mode, complaining that "no code is >: generated because subunits are missing" or somesuch. >Sounds like a good idea. You probably want to make it a warning instead >of an error, or else it will scare people. I agree with Tucker. I think this is a good idea. >: 2. Change the default of the binder to -s mode, we have been considering >: this for a while. > >: I would particularly be interested in people's reactions to suggestion 2. I think the difficulties some folks have had is that, while the -gnat options to gcc, and those of gnatbl, are quite well documented in the "user guide" known as gnatinfo.txt, the options of gnatbind do not appear ajywhere in that document. This is, I'm sure, an oversight and can easily be rectified. In the meantime, Robert pointed out to me that typing "gnatbind" by itself will produce a list of the options. >I think you should make the binder default "-s" to minimize the likelihood >of "pilot" error. This also seems most compatible with the "conventional" >Ada library model. > >-Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com >Intermetrics, Inc. Again I think Robert and Tucker have put their finger on it. When it comes to new or casual users, and especially users who are not new to Ada but are new to GNAT, IMHO GNAT's various _default_ options should be as safe as possible and as intuitive as possible, even if (as in the case of -s) there is some performance penalty. As is the case with all software, really experienced GNAT users, and those with multi-language compilations, etc., will figure out the optimal combination of options and encapsulate them in makefiles, scripts, etc. For GNAT newbies writing "conventional" Ada code, there should be as few surprises as possible in using simple commands with default options. It's clear to me that the GNAT team is sensitive to these matters and working on the right solutions. Mike Feldman