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: 103376,6e10dbd84b94a267 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: GNAT Compilation Problems Date: 1996/10/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 188873692 references: <51u63c$80c@netty.york.ac.uk> <52skmb$j8@cronkite.seas.gwu.edu> <325AE88C.BC7@empire.net> organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-10-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Michael says "If your intent is to check that a component is entirely up to date (including bodies), use "gnatmake". If you have only to check the legality and consistency of one component, then "gnatmake" has the harmful side-effect of attempting at compiling bodies, and "gcc" is better. So, I assert that "gcc" is more often the good choice than "gnatmake"." The original question was about compiling, and most people think of generating code when they are compiling. If you just want to check legality, the best tool is gnatf. But for most purposes, most people should use gnatmake all the time and not use gcc directly. The typical cycle is 1. Edit some sources 2. gnatmake the main unit 3. run and test The reason that gnatf is better than gcc for checking legality is that (a) you do not have to bother with saying -gnatc (b) you can check multiple units at the same time (c) you can generate cross reference information (d) or minimally, you can check for unused entities