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 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Simon Wright Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Precondition on protected entry Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:19:24 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="602e6bf27b4e24dfe80281f22c3a86ee"; logging-data="9701"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Oy15tKVspTQwq06sgMNe7myr6OxHxHfg=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (darwin) Cancel-Lock: sha1:kHPnmpVi33PqNulZu9cjfkH5lOc= sha1:fVuDUBGVcVdhkJgz4Kp4i3I7iFg= Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:32074 Date: 2016-10-12T08:19:24+01:00 List-Id: Dennis Lee Bieber writes: > On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 18:02:31 +0100, Simon Wright > declaimed the following: > >>I have this (Ravenscar, STM32F4) code: >> > >> function Running return Boolean; >> private > >>Is this a compiler bug, or is there something in e.g. ARM 6.1.1 that >>I've missed? > > Just off the cuff -- does moving the declaration of the function > to before the preconditions change things? No, I thought that (note that the precondition of Start_Waiting also calls the not-yet-declared function Running, and compiles OK).