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-Thread: 103376,46a68619f4362304
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.71.34.3!newsfeed.cwix.com!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Specifying parameter passing convention and place (register)
Date: 6 Jul 2004 07:58:55 -0500
Organization: LJK Software
Message-ID: <Z027UNncuT4Q@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <opsaot0qmdp4pfvb@bram-2>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1089118702 9521 192.135.80.34 (6 Jul 2004
 12:58:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 12:58:22 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2085
Date: 2004-07-06T07:58:55-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <opsaot0qmdp4pfvb@bram-2>, "Nick Roberts" <nick.roberts@acm.org> writes:
> What form should a pragma take for specifying the convention and place  
> (register or in memory) for the passing of parameters into and out of  
> subprograms?
> 
> Should these pragmas be confined to machine code insertions, or some other  
> group of subprograms, or it be permitted for all subprograms?

I would think only for non-Ada linkages (incoming and outgoing).

> Where should the pragma be placed? Should it be inside the subprogram  
> body, so that the subprogram itself is implicit and does not need to be  
> identified, or should it be in the same specification as the declaration  
> of the subprogram, or somewhere else?

GNAT has (reportedly) implemented the DEC Ada mechanism for doing this.
Why not use that ?   Unless you find a particular defect in that design,
commonality is good.