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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,38159b1b5557a2e7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-23 09:41:10 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeds-atl2!newsfeeds-atl1!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <warren@ve3wwg.tk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Standard Ada Preprocessor (Was: why ada is so unpopular ?)
References: <bub5n8$kf5$1@atlantis.news.tpi.pl>
 <49cbf610.0401170627.79c3dfe5@posting.google.com>
 <buc87c$8p$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl>
 <slrnc0je79.hlv.adi@ppc201.mipool.uni-jena.de>
 <budjfo$n18$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl> <budvvf$9al$1@online.de>
 <bue4r7$3n6$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl> <400A9B48.3060100@noplace.com>
 <slrnc0lddd.2bt.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <400BD4B5.6000307@noplace.com>
 <slrnc0nlj3.1jn.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <400BDB7C.40100@noplace.com>
 <slrnc0nncv.4qq.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <400D2150.6000705@noplace.com> <nBdPb.5187$rW5.288435@news20.bellglobal.com>
 <400E72F9.8060501@noplace.com> <LNOdncWFbKUojpLdRVn-uQ@comcast.com>
 <100upo7ln5e3k59@corp.supernews.com> <wcc7jzkoyua.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <cJTPb.16303$U77.1296078@news20.bellglobal.com>
 <4011199F.6020109@noplace.com>
In-Reply-To: <4011199F.6020109@noplace.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <FOcQb.20019$cQ6.819128@news20.bellglobal.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:26:49 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca
X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1074878757 198.96.223.163 (Fri,
 23 Jan 2004 12:25:57 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:25:57 EST
Organization: Bell Sympatico
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4727
Date: 2004-01-23T12:26:49-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Marin David Condic wrote:

> But the language already says that if an implementation doesn't 
> recognize a pragma, that it should be ignored. So you already have some 
> limited conditional compilation. Its not a big stretch to imagine from 
> there some pragma that lets you include or exclude statements depending 
> on some compile-time condition.
> 
> MDC
> 
> Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote:
> 
>> Non-standard pragmas (implementation defined) are another reason
>> why conditional compilation (or preprocessing) is required.
>> Sometimes it is necessary to use the non-standard pragmas,
>> especially when doing bindings.

That is fine, when the compiler doesn't recognize the pragma. But
what happens if two compilers both recognize an implementation
pragma, but have different requirements? Different parameters
for example?

Or how about different consequences?  Maybe it only applies
in one case, but not the other?
-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://ve3wwg.tk