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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c397a9e135b263db
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-06 07:23:20 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!opentransit.net!proxad.net!feeder2-1.proxad.net!nnrp6.proxad.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "nicolas" <n.brunot@cadwin.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <9ff447f2.0107310659.36d01e9@posting.google.com>
 <%jra7.3545$257.153834@ozemail.com.au>
 <NKj7nYr7sQCg@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <yYva7.18321$GC4.4165649@nnrp1.proxad.net> <3b6def8c.4410400@news.tc.umn.edu>
 <Zjsb7.4971$VK5.5450870@nnrp6.proxad.net>
 <17cd177c.0108060605.3dead633@posting.google.com>
Subject: Re: What happens to DEC Ada?
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
Message-ID: <rLxb7.6331$4S.5769272@nnrp6.proxad.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 14:23:19 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.101.131.241
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
X-Trace: nnrp6.proxad.net 997107799 195.101.131.241 (Mon,
 06 Aug 2001 16:23:19 CEST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 16:23:19 CEST
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11357
Date: 2001-08-06T14:23:19+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Gautier" <gautier_niouzes@hotmail.com> a �crit dans le message news:
17cd177c.0108060605.3dead633@posting.google.com...
> About your problem: shouldn't you also have different directories
> for .ali and .o files corresponding to the different compilations
> with these source files having same name and same timestamp ?
> I think you should. So, you would have a clean recompilation
> for each version without the least doubt of an undesired mixture...
> I find it a project management bug to count on smart recompilation
> for differenciating source versions. Already mixing compilations with
> different options can be a problem.
> And instead of playing with ADA_INCLUDE_PATH, it would be safer to
> select source directories with the -I option; same for objects and
> ADA_OBJECTS_PATH.

Actually we solve the problem with clean recompilation, and specific checks
to be sure that the expected source was compiled when the program starts.
This is not a big problem, we don't release our softwares with Gnat.