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,d6f7b92fd11ab291 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-17 12:29:31 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Crosspost: Help wanted from comp.compilers Date: 17 Jul 2003 15:29:23 -0400 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1058470163 23543 199.172.62.241 (17 Jul 2003 19:29:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:29:23 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:40428 Date: 2003-07-17T15:29:23-04:00 List-Id: tmoran@acm.org writes: > > Just looking at files on disk does not give any history as to whether > > a given _declaration_ within a file has changed. One might end up > > recompiling a cascading tree of modules because some entirely unused > > (yet) declaration was added to a module. > If A 'with's B and something new is added to B's spec, how does a > compiler know that the new thing is not used by A, unless it recompiles A? If A didn't change since the spec of B changed, then the compiler could know that without recompiling A. However, things can get tricky -- B might introduce a declaration that conflicts with some other declaration use-visible in A. - Bob