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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,514d84d6930cf67,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-hub.siol.net!kanja.arnes.si!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.belwue.de!LF.net!news.jgaa.com!news.hacking.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail From: Jacob Sparre Andersen Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: building a package -- newbie Date: 11 Nov 2004 17:25:48 +0100 Organization: hacking.dk - Doing fun stuff with open source Sender: sparre@sparre.crs4.it Message-ID: References: <3143fb37.0411110817.6e5200da@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: sparre.crs4.it Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: xyzzy.adsl.dk 1100190349 11735 156.148.70.170 (11 Nov 2004 16:25:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.hacking.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:25:49 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6149 Date: 2004-11-11T17:25:48+01:00 List-Id: backdoctor@gmail.com wrote: > My first real question is, "what extension should I use to name my > package?" statistal_functions.ads? statistal_functions.adb? Do I > need to compile it before it can be WITH'd into my main program? I > compile my main procedures with "gnatgcc -c file". Is that the same > for the package? The Ada standard does not say anything about file names for the source code, so you can in principle name it completely as you like, but among GNAT users the convention is to put the: * Specification in a file named as the package name (in lower case, and with "." substituted with "-"), with ".ads" appended. * Body in a file named as the package name (in lower case, and with "." substituted with "-"), with ".adb" appended. Jacob -- �By becoming continuous, war has fundamentally changed its character. In past ages, a war, almost by definition, was something that sooner or later came to an end, usually in unmistakable victory or defeat.� -- Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell �I don't think you can win [the war on terror].� -- George W. Bush