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,baa6871d466e5af9
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: AQ&S Guidance on pragma Elaborate_Body
Date: 1997/04/24
Message-ID: <E95IKB.4Gx@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 237114944
References: <528878564wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk> <dewar.861642821@merv>
 <E940xu.62B@world.std.com> <dewar.861854112@merv>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.861854112@merv>, Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
[Elaboration-order-control features are needed.]

OK, I'm convinced.

I just wish that (1) I didn't have to write zillions of pragmas in the
"normal" cases.  E.g. maybe Elaborate_Body or Preelab should be the
default, with a pragma to turn it off.  And (2) that all implementations
had to choose the same order for a given program.  The Modula-2 rules
are closer, but still don't quite make it.

- Bob