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-Thread: a07f3367d7,8147e9052e4bc0df
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!138.195.8.3.MISMATCH!news.ecp.fr!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?=
 =?utf-8?Q?=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Child vs nested package : efficiency matter
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:34:22 +0200
Organization: Ada At Home
Message-ID: <op.vdmn7kl4ule2fv@garhos>
References: <op.vdgww3flxmjfy8@garhos>
 <37b699c4-da76-4b5f-9074-0aa465af4a19@v12g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7g+UIcN0UM67WCCZrTfU2A.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.53 (Win32)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:12173
Date: 2010-06-01T17:34:22+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:03:44 +0200, Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com> a  =

=C3=A9crit:
> I can't say anything about any particular compiler.  One possibility:
> if procedure A calls procedure B, and A and B are in the same source,
> a compiler may be able to put the code of B inline in procedure A's
> code---i.e. the code for A will include B's code, rather than
> including a "call" instruction.  If it does this, then in the process,=

> it may also to be able to eliminate instructions in B's code that have=

> no effect on A.  It's a lot harder to do this if A and B are in
> different sources, which I'm assuming is happening if you are pulling
> code out of a nested package and putting it in a child package.
Adam, I've thought about it at that moment, so I've added some pragma  =

Inline for the relevant subprograms in the packages specs. This did not =
 =

change anything.

Do you think there are some reasons to believe pragma Inline is not  =

properly applied with inter-package subprograms invocations ?

-- =

There is even better than a pragma Assert: a SPARK --# check.
--# check C and WhoKnowWhat and YouKnowWho;
--# assert Ada;
--  i.e. forget about previous premises which leads to conclusion
--  and start with new conclusion as premise.