Re: Ada 95 Compatibility

[kst@thomsoft.com (Keith Thompson)]

In <4gi8o8$an2@newsbf02.news.aol.com> johnherro@aol.com (John Herro) writes:
>      In Ada 95, a package spec. that doesn't *need* an corresponding body
> can't *have* one.  Here's a simplified program segment that I wrote in Ada
> 83:
> 
> package P is
>    Buffer : array(1 .. 50) of Integer;
> end P;
> 
> package body P is
> begin
>    -- code to initialize Buffer
> end P;
> 
>      The buffer initialization is too complicated to do by initializing to
> an aggregrate in the package spec., such as one would do if initializing
> the buffer to all zeros.  Here's how I rewrote the code for Ada 95; I'm
> wondering if I did it the best way:
[chomp]

The simplest method is to add a pragma Elaborate_Body to the specification
of P, before the first declaration; this makes the body mandatory.

Other alternatives are to add an incomplete type to the private part,
which must be completed in the body, or to add a dummy procedure
declaration to the private part, which again must be completed in
the body.  (Note that there's no need to call the procedure; you can
still do the initialization in the statement part of the package body.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@thomsoft.com
TeleSoft^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Alsys^H^H^H^H^H Thomson Software Products
10251 Vista Sorrento Parkway, Suite 300, San Diego, CA, USA, 92121-2718
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." -- Arthur Carlson, WKRP