Re: Suggestion for gnatstub

["Marin David Condic" <mcondic.auntie.spam@acm.org>]

There is yet another good idea for a stub generation option. Gnatstub might
be made to optionally output A) nulled out procedures & functions that
execute with minimally impacting results or B) Exceptions so that calling
them results in a runtime error, yet they remain compilable/linkable or C)
One or more types of Text_IO statements to indicate that the subprogram got
executed and what (if any) are the values of its parameters.

It might generate all three in the output and comment out the ones that were
not selected. I wouldn't worry too much about it being able to handle 100%
of the cases because its just a development aid that ultimately has to be
replaced by hand coded stuff anyway. A few oddball cases where it generates
something unusable without mods is probably fine.

MDC
--
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jast.mil/

Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g

    "I'd trade it all for just a little more"
        --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================

Wes Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:AS9B9.2090$c6.2552@bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com...
>
> Suppose you have the spec for a subprogram.
>
> You could have an ASIS routine that looks at the spec,
> and generates a stub that prints out something like
>
>     Executing stub for function ... ( ... ) return ...
>        with parameters: param1 => ......
>
> Stephen Leake's Auto_Text_IO can do 90% of this already.
>