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: 103376,16e3a8dd4f3ab3f3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: mab@dst17.wdl.loral.com (Mark A Biggar)
Subject: Re: Elaboration order
Date: 1996/03/15
Message-ID: <4icbnc$cda@wdl1.wdl.loral.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 142869255
references: <314701A1.469D@lfwc.lockheed.com> <Do8JDv.A2v@world.std.com>
 <31494143.3825@lfwc.lockheed.com>
organization: Loral Western Development Labs
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-03-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <31494143.3825@lfwc.lockheed.com> Ken Garlington <garlingtonke@lfwc.lockheed.com> writes:
>Robert A Duff wrote:
>[the standard answer, except it didn't explain...]
>Why doesn't the subprogram body have to be elaborated before the call?

It does.

>Should I expect this problem anytime I call a subroutine? It seems
>counter-intuitive...

No, you only run into this problem when you try to call a routine during the
elaboration of a library unit.  E.g., when you call a function as part of
the initial expression of a package variable or when you call any routine
in the begin section of a package body.  Note that this is never a problem
with your main code as all library units are guarenteed to be elaborated
before the main routine is called, so any routine called after that time
won't run into this problem.

--
Mark Biggar
mab@wdl.loral.com