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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,9862c21fee63f95c,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-09 03:47:59 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: And838N@netscape.net Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Visibility and Elaboration Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 06:47:24 -0400 Organization: ENST, France Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1055155678 7461 137.194.161.2 (9 Jun 2003 10:47:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 10:47:58 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Return-Path: X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail to news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38854 Date: 2003-06-09T06:47:24-04:00 David C. Hoos, Sr. wrote: >If you look at your original post (on June 4), there was no "put_line" >statement -- hence, the reason for my question Ok, your right, there was no put_line statement. There was only the "put" statement. The compiler would still have complained. >GNAT did _not_ tell you it didn't know which one to use. Ok, that must be why I wrote "Thus, GNAT's compiler message tells me not that GNAT can't determine which count to use but that I need to specify, for future readers, which count I needed." >Using the GNAT compiler, the object file resulting from the >compilation of your package would contain a procedure named >my_pkg___elabs. That procedure contains the elaboration code for your >package specification. Cool! I'm going to check that out. Thank you. >Elaboration is nothing at all like the instantiation of a C++ class. Ok, elaboration is like the "preparation" of something declared static in C++ or Java? So your saying that all the elaborations in the following code happen before the main procedure is called? with ada.text_io, ada.integer_text_io; use ada.text_io, ada.integer_text_io; procedure newelaboration is procedure doelaboration(i: integer) is package elo is value: Integer; procedure printvalue; end elo; package body elo is procedure printvalue is begin put(value); end printvalue; end elo; begin if i < 10 then elo.value := i; doelaboration(i+1); elo.printvalue; end if; end doelaboration; begin doelaboration(1); end newelaboration; So using the "new" reserved word is different than an elaboration? Thanks for the help! Andrew __________________________________________________________________ McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network. Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397 Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge. Download Now! http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455