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: 103376,400766bdbcd86f7c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.rediris.es!newsmi-us.news.garr.it!newsmi-eu.news.garr.it!NewsITBone-GARR!newsserver.cilea.it!news.crs4.it!not-for-mail
From: Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@nbi.dk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: This can't be done in Ada...or?
Date: 15 Feb 2005 10:48:37 +0100
Organization: CRS4, Center for Adv. Studies,
 Research and Development in Sardinia
Message-ID: <rlsvf8u6tmy.fsf@jacob.crs4.it>
References: <1108139611.709714.36170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
 <2IcPd.6268$mG6.1474@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <mailman.139.1108216901.527.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <iaxPd.6841$mG6.4148@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <1108372232.436036.318690@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <UxbQd.520$IU.22@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <1108456053.837461.20340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
 <m3wttaciqw.fsf@0x53586c67.boanxx18.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk>
 <rlszmy66vfg.fsf@jacob.crs4.it>
 <m3sm3ycgpd.fsf@0x53586c67.boanxx18.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jacob.crs4.it
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pietro.crs4.it 1108459671 15727 156.148.71.80 (15 Feb 2005 09:27:51
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@nntpserver.crs4.it.
NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Feb 2005 09:27:51 GMT
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8327
Date: 2005-02-15T09:27:51+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Mark Lorenzen wrote:
> Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@nbi.dk> writes:

> > Aren't the compilers (theoretically) allowed to delay the
> > instantiation of the packgage until run-time?
> 
> Hm yes, I think they are - as the semantics is written as an "as-if"
> semantics. But if the generic package body does not need to be
> elaborated, there will probably not be any overhead.

Would a Preelaborate or Pure pragma in the generic package make any
difference here?  (although I don't think Preelaborate would be legal
in PragmARC.Reflection)

What do the compilers actually do?  My guess is that they all
instantiate the package(s) at compile-time, but I don't know (and I
only have access to GNAT).

Jacob
-- 
"Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead."