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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f188b1cd9c1f24dc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Parameter evaluation order
Date: 1998/04/10
Message-ID: <x7v67kh8uk3.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 343073649
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
References: <6g9d2o$tfg$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <matthew_heaney-ya023680000504982157020001@news.ni.net>
 <x7vemz7xncq.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>
 <matthew_heaney-ya023680001004980936440001@news.ni.net>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 892304157 nnrp-01:21772 NO-IDENT
 pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
Organization: At Home
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-04-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


matthew_heaney@acm.org (Matthew Heaney) writes:

> In article <x7vemz7xncq.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>, Simon Wright
> <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> >> declare
> >>    Arg1 : constant Arg1Type := Func_One;
> >>    Arg2 : constant Arg2Type := Func_Two;
> >> begin
> >>    proc (Arg1, Arg2);
> >> end;
> >
> >I was wondering if, because the order need arises from [invisible?]
> >side-effects, a compiler might be allowed to reorder the declarations;
> >but 3.11(7) says
> >
> >The elaboration of a declarative_part consists of the elaboration of
> >the declarative_items, if any, in the order in which they are given in
> >the declarative_part.
> 
> The term is "linear elaboration" of declarations.  You need this so you can
> use the value of an object previously declared.  It's the same as the let*
> expression in Lisp (compare let).

Yeah, but a compiler *might* have been given permission to re-order
elaborations if it could tell that there would be no difference ..