On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, EGarrulo wrote:

> Thanks.  However, my understanding is that the inlining is 
> unpredictable.  According to the RM 6.3.2 (emphasis mine):
>
> "**For each call**, an implementation is free to follow or to ignore the 
> recommendation determined by the Inline aspect. "

Well, yes! There are plenty of stupid things an Ada compiler can do, 
without formally violating the standard. Such as raising Storage_Error, 
when adding two integers.

But usually, the maintainers of Ada compilers try to avoid stupid 
behavior. A compiler is not required to support inlining and dead code 
elimination -- and I seem to recall that gnat needs to be "pushed" doing 
that by turning on optimization (at least -O1). But when a compiler does 
inlining and dead code elimination at all, I would be shocked if it would 
not actually inline and eliminate where this is obvioulsly applicable, as 
in the Debug.Trace example.

--------  I  love  the  taste  of  Cryptanalysis  in  the morning!  --------
www.uni-weimar.de/de/medien/professuren/mediensicherheit/people/stefan-lucks
----Stefan.Lucks (at) uni-weimar.de, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany----