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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.50.134.3 with SMTP id pg3mr5342867igb.7.1435179964631;
 Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:06:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.81.149 with SMTP id f21mr655847qgd.8.1435179964504; Wed,
 24 Jun 2015 14:06:04 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!j8no877651igd.0!news-out.google.com!4ni2664qgh.1!nntp.google.com!q107no3136999qgd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:06:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <c8272b03-abf4-4aee-b828-5b616ce7700e@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.99.95.58;
 posting-account=sDyr7QoAAAA7hiaifqt-gaKY2K7OZ8RQ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.99.95.58
References: <9894cde7-2cf8-4060-be65-857812ad7b09@googlegroups.com>
 <mm7310$4jk$1@dont-email.me>
 <17436268-aceb-461f-bdcf-eee8436cd0e6@googlegroups.com>
 <mm9e4f$n4e$2@dont-email.me>
 <fa1fea48-bdb6-446c-8a41-a2f34a55ed16@googlegroups.com>
 <d65db4db-ada4-4705-8cec-37a994536f8b@googlegroups.com>
 <86y4jaqzdx.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <dddbc06b-c30f-4923-85b6-f3a378982238@googlegroups.com>
 <b6dfc2ca-979c-4f16-8eca-8d4439c84db8@googlegroups.com>
 <edda2110-5468-4c8a-8679-4f1edf96b01e@googlegroups.com>
 <01ac6d30-fa93-4868-aa31-3dbec93e9a21@googlegroups.com>
 <c8272b03-abf4-4aee-b828-5b616ce7700e@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <9b539536-f385-434d-ad0c-a48e8877e23b@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: What do you think about this?
From: Laurent <lutgenl@icloud.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 21:06:04 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:193766
Date: 2015-06-24T14:06:04-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 07:57:51 UTC+2, Anh Vo  wrote:
 
> In addition, "pragma Assertion_Policy (Check);" should be added at the top of the package. This >pragma has the same effect as switch -gnata under GNAT. Of course, all compiler must comply with >pragma Assertion_Policy.

Ah ok now I can see a difference. At least now I get additional info where the problem comes from. Instead of "Oops error"

Thanks.