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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx05.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!usenet-fr.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 13:24:12 +0200
From: "G.B." <rm-dash-bau-haus@dash.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Elaboration order handling (Was: Bug in 'gnatmake')
References: 
 <7f33982d-3bcf-452e-a3b3-3a0a28505ff1@x20g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
 <87r4g0g9c0.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk> <lysj0glghs.fsf@pushface.org>
 <87ip1bg4z2.fsf_-_@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk>
 <wcczjun4a7y.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <db04ccb2-a3f7-4daa-8846-df9a992a0f85@googlegroups.com>
 <wccip1acmt5.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <53d0b070-a03b-43d0-a560-68dd3a8bebf5@googlegroups.com>
 <51c218df$0$6623$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <wcctxkt61kw.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
In-Reply-To: <wcctxkt61kw.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <51c2e65c$0$6634$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Jun 2013 13:24:12 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: a7ba88c0.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=I<?0Q59SGO2RadXUBHgFh3A9EHlD;3Yc24Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;SWM54i`XW]<nc\616M64>:Lh>_cHTX3j=hMUj@]dF738
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:15859
Date: 2013-06-20T13:24:12+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 20.06.13 02:57, Robert A Duff wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:
>
>> Having had to live with products of programmers favoring symbolic
>> cleverness, I naturally think of what happens when some project
>> depend on lexicographical order and then someone wishes to give
>> packages different names. ARGH!
>
> Of course programmers shouldn't do that (depend on lexicographical
> order).

Well, programmers will depend on anything that is known,
more so if the standard defines it. (Like INT_MAX/Max_Int
is 2**31-1, you know...)

However, a configuration pragma for elaboration should be fine?
It says,
  "Take this way of walking the dependency graph"

Stating the way then prevents configuration from being an
implicit consequence of the LRM. It also adds a way of
testing different paths of elaboration.