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: 103376,7f1e0b399cd01cb0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Unreferenced lock variables
Date: 1999/04/12
Message-ID: <x7vk8viqsla.fsf@pogner.moho>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 465368303
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
References: <x7v4smnszvu.fsf@pogner.moho> <7ero31$n46$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 923897147 nnrp-13:10301 NO-IDENT
 pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
Organization: At Home
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-04-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com> writes:

> In article <x7v4smnszvu.fsf@pogner.moho>,
>   Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > is there a better way [of avoiding the warning]
> 
> why not
> 
>  pragma Warnings (Off, Lock);

Because I'm concerned that aggressive optimization (-O3) will
eliminate the lock variable altogether.

The last time this happened was

  Dummy : Foo := Some_Function_With_Side_Effects;

and -O3 ended up without the side effects.