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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,d87fe6752812f07a X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: anon@anon.org (anon) Subject: Re: GNAT on WinXP: System.OS_Lib.Spawn raises Program_Error Reply-To: anon@anon.org (anon) References: <50d832b4-140d-4029-8d7c-9397115160ba@u8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 2.0 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 23:20:05 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.65.66.250 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1241306405 12.65.66.250 (Sat, 02 May 2009 23:20:05 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 23:20:05 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5663 Date: 2009-05-02T23:20:05+00:00 List-Id: Ed. If that was correct, then using "System.OS_LIB" would generated a compiler WARNING, but no error or warning is given. So, that package is usable as is. Compiling overhead depends upon how many places packages are used. And some people count every cpu cycle. One wasted cycle may be too much, and it could cost someone life. I am talking about medical operations, such as pin-point radation treatements. In , "Ed Falis" writes: >On Sat, 02 May 2009 16:39:57 -0400, anon wrote: > >> GNAT.OS_LIB existed in GNAT 3.15p but since GNAT 2005 it have been >> moved to System.OS_LIB. And the GNAT.OS_LIB just renames System.OS_LIB >> which makes this package a legacy for older projects and can be avoided >> for >> future use. It just causes more work for the compiler which increase the >> compile time. > >You're wrong. GNAT.OS_Lib is the intended interface for users (normally >you will get a warning about using an implementation unit subject to >unpredictable change if you use System.OS_Lib). GNAT.OS_Lib is an >implementation-defined unit provided to users. That it is a renaming of >System.OS_Lib is irrelevant (and also does not cause any noticable >compilation overhead). > >- Ed