From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!cleanfeed2-a.proxad.net!nnrp1-2.free.fr!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <5ff9779d$0$24281$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
 <i5u1apFp2qsU1@mid.individual.net> <5ffb311f$0$16185$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
 <i612tpFd3olU1@mid.individual.net>
From: DrPi <314@drpi.fr>
Subject: Re: Record initialisation question
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 22:27:15 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <i612tpFd3olU1@mid.individual.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <5ffb7135$0$24247$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jan 2021 22:27:17 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.65.30.55
X-Trace: 1610314037 news-3.free.fr 24247 82.65.30.55:51663
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:61094
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le 10/01/2021 à 20:30, Niklas Holsti a écrit :
> On 2021-01-10 18:53, DrPi wrote:
>> Le 09/01/2021 à 16:44, Niklas Holsti a écrit :
>     ...
>>>
>>> Do you expect the compiler/linker to generate the full value of the 
>>> Dcd object into the program image at compilation and link time? 
>> That's it.
>>
>>> Have you ensured that the construction of the Dcd object requires no 
>>> elaboration code? Most Flash memories cannot be written in the same 
>>> way as RAM, so even if that .txt section is not write-protected, 
>>> normal RAM-oriented elaboration code would not be able to write into 
>>> Flash.
>> I'm aware of this (I'm an electronics guy).
>> I'll add a "pragma No_Elaboration_Code_All;" when I'm ready.
> 
> 
> Better add it now, because if you add it later, the compiler may then 
> complain that it cannot implement the Dcd aggregate without elaboration 
> code, and you will have to work around that somehow.
> 
> A good while ago, a colleague had a problem where a large constant array 
> aggregate would require elaboration code if written in named form (Index 
> => Value, Index => Value, ...), and it was necessary to write it in 
> positional form (Value, Value, ...) to get rid of the elaboration code. 
> It can be tricky, so it is better to be warned early of any problems.
Thanks for letting me know.
Any reason why the behavior changes with the way of writing ?