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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,baa6871d466e5af9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: michael@ifr.luftfahrt.uni-stuttgart.de (Michael Paus) Subject: Re: AQ&S Guidance on pragma Elaborate_Body Date: 1997/04/19 Message-ID: <5jabeq$3ltk@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 235939222 References: <528878564wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk> Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-04-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: > I am not quite sure I can understand this, but the proper approach in > Ada 95 is > > make packages Pure if possible > else > make packages Preelaborate if possible > else > use pragma Elaborate_Body if possible > else > use pragma Elaborate_All on clients if possible > else > take a very careful hard look at your program -- it is suspicious! Hm ? If there is such a simple and strict rule on how to apply this kind of pragmas, I wonder why the compiler does not do it automatically. The compiler does check whether my pragma settings are correct. So it seems to be quite straight forward for the compiler to automatically insert the highest level of purity. Are there any undesirable side effects when doing that or is the rule not as simple as you said ? Just curious Michael -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --Dr.-Ing. Michael Paus (Member: Team Ada) --University of Stuttgart, Inst. of Flight Mechanics and Flight Control --Forststrasse 86, 70176 Stuttgart, Germany --Phone: (+49) 711-121-1434 FAX: (+49) 711-634856 --Email: Michael.Paus@ifr.luftfahrt.uni-stuttgart.de (NeXT-Mail welcome)