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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,80ae596d36288e8a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 23:44:43 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why no socket package in the standard ?
References: <op.vvyoslycule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <9cb23235-8824-43f4-92aa-d2e8d10e7d8c@ct4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <4ddb5bd7$0$302$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
 <4ddb81b8$0$7628$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <op.vvz3hpb7ule2fv@douda-yannick> <87aaeban8a.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <op.vvz4zgm2ule2fv@douda-yannick> <8762ozahib.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <op.vv0bpcojule2fv@douda-yannick> <871uznaczz.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <015e3d6a-772a-41f8-a057-49c8b7bd80e1@w21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vv0qr4d5ule2fv@douda-yannick> <4MednVYCXuUZQEHQRVn_vwA@giganews.com>
 <op.vv1mmggpule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <6d913128-402e-47cc-ae3e-273b65198507@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
 <cbfc9788-b472-4c2a-b598-489b1e7ff717@g28g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
 <5acc868f-6f77-4a8d-be43-b9c926eb9c08@h9g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
 <65dd1431-c6b2-42bd-bbab-27e1ad61a6c4@32g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vv3pm6d6ule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <4ddebc11$0$6554$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <op.vv3wqj2jule2fv@douda-yannick>
In-Reply-To: <op.vv3wqj2jule2fv@douda-yannick>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <4ddec9cb$0$6543$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 May 2011 23:44:44 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7f96e78e.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=>;B7_M13HY885[]]\]T0814IUK<Cl32<14Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;jKndh@]XiH1PCY\c7>ejV8d8\2A`cmW@2cBWE0\cdnR0
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19504
Date: 2011-05-26T23:44:44+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 5/26/11 11:02 PM, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
> Le Thu, 26 May 2011 22:46:09 +0200, Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> a écrit:
>> In the case of ObjectAda or other frontends built around AdaMagic
>> a program called adareg or similar will permit adding files and
>> paths to the Ada libary; files can consist of more than one
>> compilation unit, no chopping is needed (even though a 1:1
>> correspondence has been recommended).
> Yes, I know the standard does not requires a single compilation unit per file, while GNAT can't handle this. This may be a big enough difference between Ada compilers. Except that, all are able to handle dependencies, and all you need is typically a search path and a mapping from compilation unit name to file names. This is simpler than what many Makefiles looks like.
>
>
>> compilation unit, no chopping is needed (even though a 1:1
>> correspondence has been recommended).
> Recommended by whom ?
>
I think by one of the makers of the front end, considering
advantages that 1:1 may have when computing compilation
requirements after changes.