Re: Standard Ada Preprocessor

["Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <warren@ve3wwg.tk>]

Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:

> Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote:
>>Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
>>>Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote:
>>>But don't you agree that allowing a preprocessor to work on
>>>package specifications isn't exactly good Ada style.
>>
>>No argument. But I do have a problem to solve. The problem is ugly,
>>and the solution might be ugly too ;-)
> 
> :-(
> 
> Do you have any examples, where you would have, or actually have, used
> a preprocessor on package specifications?  (I hope I haven't missed
> some in the discussion)

I've kind of run out of steam on this thread. I've pointed out
some general examples in the earlier parts of this thread.

>>So given the above, the real resistance is boils down to the
>>argument "I don't want to ever see it".
> 
> If you are talking about full C preprocessor style conditional
> compilation, you are certainly right.

No, actually (this has been discussed earlier in this thread).
Remember that some of C/C++'s problems are related to #include
which is quite different that with-ing a package. However, there
are times when you want to with one package over another (for
example you want to use the GNAT.* package(s) when using GNAT,
and something else to replace if compiling with another compiler).
This is just one example and of course you need to conditionally
compile code depending upon which package(s) you have with-ed
because the functionality may not be the same (certainly the
hierarchical names for the package defined items are different
also).

-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://ve3wwg.tk