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,baa6871d466e5af9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney) Subject: Re: AQ&S Guidance on pragma Elaborate_Body Date: 1997/04/21 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 236378074 References: <528878564wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk> Organization: Estormza Software Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-04-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) wrote: >In article , >Matthew Heaney wrote: >>In article , dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: >>>And this guideline is a poor one. You only need to use pragma Elaborate >>>for generics named in the context clause if you instantiate the generic >>>in your own elaboration code > >...which is almost always the case, in my experience... > >>... -- and furthermore, if you *do* such an >>>instantiation, use Elaborate_All, not Elaborate > >Agreed. Always use ELaborate_All instead of Elaborate, except when >mutual recursion forces you to use Elaborate. (And, of course, use >Pure, Preelaborate, or Elaborate_Body in preference to either Elab or >Elab_All.) OK, just so I understand this perfectly: If the generic package has used one of the pragmas Pure, Preelaborate, or Elaborate_Body, does that mean I the instantiator do not have to use pragma Elaborate_All? generic ... package GQ is pragma Pure; ... end GQ; with GQ; <<<--- No pragma Elaborate_All required, right? package P is package Q is new GQ (...); end P; Matt -------------------------------------------------------------------- Matthew Heaney Software Development Consultant (818) 985-1271