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, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,aea4cc77526f5e4a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!club-internet.fr!feedme-small.clubint.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:18:50 +0100 From: Georg Bauhaus Reply-To: rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Separate Compilation in Programming Languages References: <7xJvj.7420$Ru4.4246@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net> <1wkwj.10399$0o7.2971@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <47c67c7a$0$25506$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> Organization: Arcor NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Feb 2008 10:18:50 CET NNTP-Posting-Host: fc79dbab.newsspool1.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=R\BH3YR:?dgMLKab8WA:ho7QcPOVSN0^1kdSgYi]_=lZGmFGRkS X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20137 Date: 2008-02-28T10:18:50+01:00 List-Id: Ray Blaak wrote: > Robert A Duff writes: >>> GNAT's library model lives on a different place on the tradeoff curve as >>> compared to the other Ada vendors. It allows some problems to be avoided at >>> the expense of suffering from other possible problems that the other Ada >>> vendors do not. >> What's the "suffering" you see here? > > None myself. I am speaking theoretically. There must be *some* advantage to the > library approaches the other vendors use, right? Right? :-) E.g., gnatmake without gnatchop is incomplete. The GNAT compiler proper succeeds translating Ada programs when the source text is organized into one-file:one-unit. Or, maybe you'll have to create a number of specially named files in the presence of subunits. The advantages have been explained... Q: "What source files is the compilation system actually using?" The answer would probably have to be a detailed one in the GNAT case. For other compilers, it might be A: "Read the file that lists the units." GNAT's default model delegates source code organisation to the programmer, suggesting a suitable set of files. (The advantages have been explained...). This doesn't remove a need for tools that let you switch views of spec and body. Can you submit this Ada source program to just gnatmake? -- %< -- %< -- %< procedure Foo; -- Does nothing, really procedure Foo is begin null; end Foo; -- %< -- %< -- %< Perhaps gnatchop with gnatmake is be easier to implement than some other schemes. The advantages have been explained... But in the end, gnatchop + gnatmake is good enough. Just use the GNAT scheme for every Ada project. ;-)