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,baa6871d466e5af9
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: AQ&S Guidance on pragma Elaborate_Body
Date: 1997/04/18
Message-ID: <dewar.861414695@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 235895251
References: <528878564wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


JP Thornley asks

<<So is there a meaningful message struggling to get out here?  [Perhaps
"a clear requirement" can be replaced by "no requirement", so that a
successful build confirms that no circular package depencies have been
introduced unwittingly.]>>

I am not quite sure I can understand this, but the proper approach in
Ada 95 is

  make packages Pure if possible
else
  make packages Preelaborate if possible
else
  use pragma Elaborate_Body if possible
else
  use pragma Elaborate_All on clients if possible
else
  take a very careful hard look at your program -- it is suspicious!