Re: Why can't objects be static in Ada?

[Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>]

On 19-04-17 00:16 , Lucretia wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 April 2019 22:07:24 UTC+1, Niklas Holsti  wrote:
>
>> Why are you so fixated on elaboration? Many non-Ada libraries
>> require initialization calls. Moreover, I believe a C++ program can
>> have compiler-generated initialization code similar to Ada
>> elaboration code.
>
> Not everything needs it, the example in this thread shouldn't need
> it.

So what? Why do you care?

>>> I don't think it can, going by this thread. I also think this is
>>> why Ada will fail in other environments, i.e. not security or
>>> safety critical stuff, but where performance is important.
>>
>> Performance is plenty important in many embedded real-time
>> applications, where Ada works just fine.
>
> Not every application is embedded, which is my point.

You have a problem only for non-embedded applications? Is that why 
start-up time is important, because your entire applications are 
frequently started up, run for a short time to do some single thing, and 
then stop?

>> Elaboration of library items consumes execution time only at the
>> start of a program. Do you have some stringent start-up deadlines?
>
> Not exactly, but it would be nice to be able to know that something
> which shouldn't need elaboration, doesn't use elaboration.

So the thing you want is a "nice to have" feature? And you claim that 
the lack of that feature means that Ada "will fail"? Not convincing to me.

Use the GNAT pragma No_Elaboration_Code, as others have suggested. If 
you feel strongly about this point, suggest to the ARG that this pragma 
should be standardized.

I have occasionally needed to write packages with guaranteed absence of 
elaboration code, when operations in those packages are called from the 
low-level start-up code, to perform some HW initialization before Ada 
elaboration. No_Elaboration_Code worked for me.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .