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,c30642befcd7bf85
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: New GNAT ports (was Re: Ada and Automotive Industry)
Date: 1997/01/07
Message-ID: <dewar.852652762@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 208313382
references: <dewar.851455793@merv> <5asvku$jtu$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Richard suggests:

[%] The pragma is
        pragma Origin(non-negative constant integer expression);
    saying that the first byte of the textually following statement
    is to be at the given address.  That was the only thing I saw in
    the 8051 book I was reading that I couldn't do in a reasonable
    Ada subset.

Well if we added this pragma, it is clear the argument should be of
type address, but in any case the pragma is redundant. The proper
diction is:

  for label'address use expression

and then you simply label the statement

It actually makes more conceptual sense to me to put a subprogram
at a particular address, rather than a statement, in which case you
can use

  for subprogram'address use expression

which is more familiar (and more likely to be supported out of the box,
although GNAT suports neither diction currently).