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: 103376,55f243f32a97dc7e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Elaboration_check For Instantiations
Date: 1997/10/24
Message-ID: <dewar.877716708@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 285381340
References: <1997Oct23.205254.25272@nosc.mil>
 <EIK5DE.JpG.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu
X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 877716780 6042 (None) 128.122.140.58
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-10-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Tucker said

<<Well, then I guess these compilers all had a common bug.  Alternatively,
the code was compiled with Elaboration_Check suppressed.  You
could add "pragma Suppress(Elaboration_Check);" to the above code,
and it would probably not raise Program_Error (though it would then be
officially erroneous, per RM95 11.5(26)).>>


Actually, GNAT would still raise Program_Error. This particular case is
easily caught at compile time, and GNAT actually replaces the instantiation
by a "raise Program_Error" statement. There is no runtime check to be
suppressed, so the pragma Suppress has no effect!