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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d5cbc012ac099061
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-05-20 13:22:52 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!enews.sgi.com!telocity-west!TELOCITY!newsrump.sjc.telocity.net!not-for-mail
From: "David C. Hoos, Sr." <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <NMBN6.5769$DW1.255373@iad-read.news.verio.net>
 <3B07AB9C.C02C5D56@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Non-Stub In Inner Scope?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <vIVN6.1075$ce.2085421@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>
X-Trace: 
 MjcgTm9BdXRoVXNlciBURUxPQ0lUWS1SRUFERVJTIDIxNi4yMjcuNDcuNDkgIFN1biwgMjAgTWF5!IDIwMDEgMTM6MjI6NTEgUERU
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward ALL headers when reporting abuse.
X-Complaints-To: abuse@telocity.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 13:22:51 PDT
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 15:07:49 -0500
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7664
Date: 2001-05-20T15:07:49-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Marc A. Criley" <mcqada@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3B07AB9C.C02C5D56@earthlink.net...
> Dr Nancy's Sweetie wrote:
> >
> > Both solutions also have the problem that I'd have to have the body of
> > Wont_Work() in the example.adb file, making it impossible to do separate
> > compilation.  There are several functions that go along with
Wont_Work(),
> > and they're pretty long.  They are debugged and stable at this point,
> > which is why I wanted to move them out; the rest of the package is still
> > in flux.  Recompiling that code over and over can consume a lot of time.
>
> While it's been mentioned that moving "Wont_Work" out of the function
> and into the package body has been suggested, you should know that if
> you're using the GNAT Ada 95 compiler, the bodies of all of package's
> "separates" are compiled when the package body is compiled, despite
> their being in separate files.  Other compilers may well handle this
> situation differently.
>
True enough -- but you can still compile a separate sepearetely with GNAT,
even though other stubbed units may not be present, so this still permits
separate compilation with appropriate error messages, even though no
object file will be produced untill all spearates are present anc compile
correctly.