TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Simon Wright <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 05:27:36 +0000
In-Reply-To:
Reply-To:
Simon Wright <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (12 lines)
> From: "Kester, Rush W." <[log in to unmask]>

> In my experience, the "cycles" for circular dependencies are never
> very large.

We had a cycle with 750 units (or so; anyway, rather more units than
in the compilation!)

One thing to watch out for is library-level tasks (task Foo is ..)
which call operations in other units. They need to become task types.
GNAT 3.14 has a long discussion on elaboration issues in the UM.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2