From: fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: Sequential_Mixed_IO (DEC) for GNAT
Date: 1996/03/28
Date: 1996-03-28T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4je18l$ouf@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: dewar.827954747@schonberg
dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
>Fergus asks
>
>">For GNAT, the -gnat83 switch is like a
>>configuration pragma, the entire program must be compild wit
>>this switch consistently.
>
>Just curious: why is that the case? Does it change how data
>is represented, and if so, in what way?"
>
>No, it changes nothing at all in the code or the data.
Then why can't you mix-and-match units compiled with and without -gnat83?
I'm confused.
>But didn't you start this thread?
Nope.
>The answer, as you discovered is sometimes no.
Perhaps if I had discovered this, I would know why. But it wasn't me.
Maybe I missed some important part of this thread which explained it.
--
Fergus Henderson WWW: http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh
fjh@cs.mu.oz.au PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3
prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-03-28 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-03-25 0:00 Sequential_Mixed_IO (DEC) for GNAT Doug Rogers
1996-03-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-03-27 0:00 ` Fergus Henderson
1996-03-27 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-03-28 0:00 ` Fergus Henderson [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox