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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!skvax1.csc.ti.COM!linnig
From: linnig@skvax1.csc.ti.COM
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Optimizing out elaborations
Message-ID: <8810141348.AA22416@ti.com>
Date: 14 Oct 88 13:33:33 GMT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


 Fred Hosch <fred@cs.utexas.EDU> writes:

> It's not clear to me that LRM 11.6(7) permits the compiler to optimize
> away the declaration elaboration.  If K were a variable subsequently
> assigned, the "predefined operation" of assignment "need not be invoked."
> I think a CONSTRAINT_ERROR or NUMERIC_ERROR is required to be raised
> in this case?

Imagine the following program segment:
        
	count: integer := 0;
	function counter return integer;

	a: constant integer := counter;
	b: constant integer := counter;	
	c: constant integer := counter;
	
	function counter return integer is
	begin count := count +1;
	  return count;
	end;
	...

I sure would expect A and C to get 1 and 3 respectively; even if the
compiler optimized away the variable B.

	Mike Linnig,
	Texas Instruments