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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a96494c0cf26ab81
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: generic procedure'address or pragma convention?
Date: 1996/04/06
Message-ID: <dewar.828846606@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 146180542
references: <4k74lg$ni9@news2.delphi.com>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-04-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

tmoran says:

"I tried something like this in Alsys Personal ActivAda and they complain
about 'pragma call_in(actual_WndProc)' because it's not library level.
I tried their 'enter_callback;' stuff and it crashed.  The Ada 95 RM
says pragma convention may be restricted to library units. I can
certainly see that you can't straightforwardly generate link names
for generic instantiations, but they aren't necessary here.  And handling
code-sharing generics could take some cleverness.  That's why I asked
if its 'likely' that a compiler would support this sort of thing."

Well of course exactly what Convention pragmas are supported is indeed
implementation dependent. I would think that it is likely that an Ada 95
compiler would support your proposed usage. GNAT certainly does (of
course that does not prove that all Ada 95 compilers will, you will
have to check this compiler by compiler).