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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d6f7b92fd11ab291 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-17 01:20:10 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!pd2nf1so.cg.shawcable.net!residential.shaw.ca!news-out.superfeed.net!propagator2-maxim!news-in-maxim.spamkiller.net!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!cycny01.gnilink.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny01.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: Hyman Rosen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030708 Thunderbird/0.1a X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Crosspost: Help wanted from comp.compilers References: <_ArRa.81541$H17.26007@sccrnsc02> In-Reply-To: <_ArRa.81541$H17.26007@sccrnsc02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 07:59:07 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.84.202.76 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: nwrdny01.gnilink.net 1058428747 162.84.202.76 (Thu, 17 Jul 2003 03:59:07 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 03:59:07 EDT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:40389 Date: 2003-07-17T07:59:07+00:00 List-Id: tmoran@acm.org wrote: > If you recompile the spec with a different optimization level then > some things (record layouts, for instance) might change, and you > certainly had better recompile anything that depends on that spec. I don't see how such fundamental differences are going to coexist in the same program. What if I then recompile one thing that depends on this spec with different flags? > If you made no changes to the source > of a spec and you made no changes to the compiler switches, and you are > using the same identical compiler exe, and you didn't clobber the object > file, then why the heck are you recompiling? Nervous habit? > I just 'touch'ed a spec file, but made no changes. I then ran gnatmake > with the same options as previously. Lo and behold, Gnat recompiled the > spec, the body, and the main program that 'with'ed that spec. So Gnat > most assuredly does recompile when there might be a change. GNAT is using the source file timestamp as a proxy for its having changed. In my opinion, that's much more reasonable than using the object file timestamp.