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,de68e4ddf10693
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: jerry@jvdsys.stuyts.nl (Jerry van Dijk)
Subject: Re: Multiple pragma Imports
Date: 1998/12/27
Message-ID: <F4MsBB.6D@jvdsys.stuyts.nl>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 426179008
References: <762u9n$kfn$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <F4LKJL.7z@jvdsys.stuyts.nl>
 <1998Dec27.083157.1@eisner>
Organization: * JerryWare *, Leiden, Holland
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-12-27T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Larry Kilgallen (kilgallen@eisner.decus.org) wrote:

: > To get the behaviour I would like to see, the interfacing pragmas should
: > somehow be able to discern between the different subprogram signatures.
: > Maybe this calls for some extended interfacing pragma form, to be 
: > implemented by general consensus. 

: The real world need is vanishingly small for calling external
: subprograms which share a name but not interface characteristics.

What I was thinking of was situations like:

int   min (int a, int b);
float min (float a, float b);

and such.

Jerry.

-- 
-- Jerry van Dijk  | email: jdijk@acm.org
-- Leiden, Holland | member Team-Ada
-- Ada & Win32: http://stad.dsl.nl/~jvandyk