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!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Luke A. Guest <laguest@archeia.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: no code generation for c strings
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 21:30:49 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <814658902.486678528.509196.laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
References: <369391051.486634184.002061.laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
 <nireuk$1cnp$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <ly8tymqlpn.fsf@pushface.org>
 <718de74d-ab15-4eee-983f-b78d8f8070f1@googlegroups.com>
 <ly60tqqffo.fsf@pushface.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: L/3Ua2dM6oCRC/18+A91Dg.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.1.8 (iPhone/iPod Touch)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bxg67zroiLexUOlp5m7GXL0DOJE=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:30591
Date: 2016-06-03T21:30:49+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> wrote:
> Lucretia <laguest9000@googlemail.com> writes:
> 
>> Interesting, I tried this and dumped the asm, similar there, but as
>> soon as you add more code, it just gets confusing, because it never
>> references the actual label for the string anywhere.
> [...]
>> S3 : constant C.char_array := "hello" & C.char'Val (0);
>> begin
>> --     Put_Line (C.To_Ada (S3));
> 
> You've commented out the only place where the variable is referenced --
> here, it made up a label (LC1) and referenced that.
> 

Yeah that was on purpose as it produced a lot of stuff that complicated
looking at it, in hindsight I probably should've just done an assignment,
might've produced less. 

I'm still not sure why your way of doing this produced the desired effect
though.