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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC 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: ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen)
Subject: Re: Elaboration order
Date: 1996/03/20
Message-ID: <4ipdfj$1fv2@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 143207471
distribution: world
references: <314701A1.469D@lfwc.lockheed.com>
 <4io8rn$gfn@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <DoKLs8.727@world.std.com>
organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
reply-to: ncohen@watson.ibm.com
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-03-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <DoKLs8.727@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com
(Robert A Duff) writes: 

|> You need pragma Elaborate[_All](Generic_Package), assuming the generic
|> itself doesn't have any pragma (like Elaborate_Body).

Concerning the "[_All]": 

In fact, for a library generic unit, Elaborate is always sufficient,
since the elaboration of a generic body does not have any semantic effect
(other than to mark the generic body as ready for instantiation).  In
particular, it cannot call a subprogram or instantiate a generic with a
still-unelaborated body.  There is a small chance that Elaborate_All will
introduce too many constraints on the elaboration order, making it
impossible to find an acceptable order.

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com