Re: How to exit an Ada program with (unix shell) error code?

[Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>]

Martin schrieb:
> On May 6, 9:41 am, a...@anon.org (anon) wrote:
>> By your logic, who said procedures are portable!
> 
> Perhaps you could rephrase that into a meaning sentence?
> 
> 
>>  Using RM 10.2 (29), a
>> vendor could easily restrict the "main subprograms" to functions only.
> 
> No they can't - read the sentence begining "However". In fact, here it
> is:
> 
>   "However, an implementation is required to support all main
>    subprograms that are public parameterless library procedures."

Indeed, and why would anyone want to use compiler hacks when
there is a prefectly well documented standard solution
involving exit codes?

A competition with C programmers? Like, "I, an Ada programmer,
can play the same tricks, in Ada, as you can in C, no hassle
at all?  I'm just as clever as you are because, me too,
can rely on compiler docs and platform conventions
for dealing with int as return codes?" Goodness.

What is wrong with the standard, if naturally implementation-defined,
Exit_Status that *guarantees* the OS will be able to deal with
it?
Doing otherwise (i.e. trying to use a function instead)
might force rewriting the function as a main procedure
and call Set_Exit_Status when switching compilers.
So what is the point?

Use Ada, even when your compiler is GNAT.