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,f188b1cd9c1f24dc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Corey Ashford" <corSPAMey@rational.com>
Subject: Re: Parameter evaluation order
Date: 1998/04/06
Message-ID: <6ga50i$f29$1@usenet.rational.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 341296958
References: <6g9d2o$tfg$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Organization: Rational Software
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-04-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



Mark.Rutten@dsto.defence.gov.au wrote in message
<6g9d2o$tfg$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
>
>I'm using GNAT3.09 on WindowsNT (and also Solaris, but I didn't get
>this problem).
>
>I compiled a procedure call similar to the following
>
>  proc(func_one,func_two);
>
>The program relies on func_one being called _before_ func_two. But
>at run-time the code above did the opposite! Is this a bug (and if so, has
it
>been fixed in 3.10)? Or is there something written in the language
definition
>to justify this behaviour?
>
>Thanks,
>Mark Rutten


See the Ada RM 6.4 (10)

(10)
    For the execution of a subprogram call, the name or prefix of the call
is evaluated, and each parameter_association is evaluated (see 6.4.1).
    If a default_expression is used, an implicit parameter_association is
assumed for this rule. These evaluations are done in an arbitrary order.
    The subprogram_body is then executed. Finally, if the subprogram
completes normally, then after it is left, any necessary assigning back of
    formal to actual parameters occurs (see 6.4.1).