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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c1983ae2deb642ab X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-25 15:31:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada -vs- GNAT Date: 25 May 2002 15:31:06 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0205251431.4be9265d@posting.google.com> References: <5ee5b646.0205250737.4ec74872@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1022365866 13100 127.0.0.1 (25 May 2002 22:31:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 May 2002 22:31:06 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24802 Date: 2002-05-25T22:31:06+00:00 List-Id: "chris.danx" wrote in message news:... > No, having two pragmas that do the same thing is what IMO > is clutter (when just one will do, and there's one > already present) > I'm relying on what Steve posted, and don't know if > there's any other difference related to this pragma apart > from the shorthand. Do you imagine that we would have two pragmas that did exactly the same thing in a case like this (where we are introducing the pragmas?) [we do have some equivalent pragmas when we are copying pragmas from others :-)] And that if we did, we would perturb the bootstrap path to replace a pragma by something equivalent? We are not that lunatic :-) pragma Warnings (Off, entity) kills *all* warnings for the given entity. It is a blunt tool indeed for this purpose. pragma Unreferenced (Entity) is a specification that the given entity is intentionally unreferenced. It not only kills the warning for the entity not being referenced, but it also generates a warning if it *is* referenced. In other words it is a clear specification. Also it does NOT kill any other warnings related to the entity. So pragma Unreferenced is really *far* more appropriate. It is more effective and much more clearly self documenting as to what is going on. We *far* prefer to use pragma Unreferenced for unreferenced formals, but we can't do it yet, because it would create a bootstrap path problem.