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: 103376,12c1e4936587932e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.k-dsl.de!feeder.erje.net!news-1.dfn.de!news.uni-weimar.de!not-for-mail From: stefan-lucks@see-the.signature Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: overriding in private part Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 13:46:24 +0200 Organization: Bauhaus-Universitaet Weimar Message-ID: References: <45b4a4cc-13f5-4175-9061-9c962e32d762@64g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> <47e26a8d-d104-46c5-b841-667f6e556792@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> Reply-To: stefan-lucks@see-the.signature NNTP-Posting-Host: medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: tigger.scc.uni-weimar.de 1223202936 9800 141.54.178.228 (5 Oct 2008 10:35:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@tigger.scc.uni-weimar.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 10:35:36 +0000 (UTC) X-X-Sender: lucks@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de In-Reply-To: Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2238 Date: 2008-10-05T13:46:24+02:00 List-Id: On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, Robert A Duff wrote: > If you use a compiler that warns on missing "overriding", then you don't > need to say "not overriding", because that's the default -- any > subprogram that doesn't say "overriding" is not overriding. > Saying "not overriding" is just noise. "If you use a compiler that [does the right thing]" (or rather, if you use that compiler and the right set compiler switches) that works more or less fine. Except that you get only a warning on something that ought to be treated as an error. (Yes, I know that gnat has a switch to treat warnings as errors.) But a compiler-agnostic way to enforce the proper behaviour (overriding indicators for all the subprograms which actually override another subprogram) would be preferable, IMHO. I wish there was an Ada 05 "pragma Overriding_Indicators_For_All_Oriding_Subprograms" or the like. Or did I overlook something like that in the standard? So long Stefan -- ------ Stefan Lucks -- Bauhaus-University Weimar -- Germany ------ Stefan dot Lucks at uni minus weimar dot de ------ I love the taste of Cryptanalysis in the morning! ------