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-Thread: 103376,c406e0c4a6eb74ed
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer01.cox.net!cox.net!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ADA Popularity Discussion Request
Date: 19 Sep 2004 12:22:27 +0100
Organization: Pushface
Sender: simon@smaug.pushface.org
Message-ID: <x7vmzzm4i6k.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
References: <49dc98cf.0408110556.18ae7df@posting.google.com>
 <17sx057ro5jw5$.t2qlaeoxg611$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1095082522.132276@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <18ym85v67zof3$.7oqswzjfgswr.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1095090665.624419@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <68zmgy3b894u.rs67cy6jjfiq$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <ci6cc6$9br$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <e749549b.0409152029.21d9a091@posting.google.com>
 <1164383.Vq7EPUUJyU@linux1.krischik.com>
 <cicn0s$516$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <2177491.OlAk1RxoCA@linux1.krischik.com>
 <cihol4$bio$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1095593305 535 62.49.19.209 (19 Sep 2004 11:28:25
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:28:25 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3840
Date: 2004-09-19T12:22:27+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> writes:

> Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> :> for constants,
> :> 
> :>    X: constant Ragged :=
> :>     ( new String'("1"),
> :>     ...
> :> 
> :> does just as well, the allocations are performed by the compiler,
> :> not at run time :-)
> : 
> : Really! I did not know that! Where does it say in the RM - or is a compiler
> : dependent optimisation.
> 
> I've found it to be true, and it looks like compatible with
> "evaluation of an allocator" and elaboration (control, preelaborate?).
> I don't know whether there is a sentence addressing this directly,
> maybe the experts can tell?
> 
> Both ObjectAda and GNAT do this. I don't know whether it is at
> all possible to intruct ObjectAda not to "preallocate" constant
> string pointers.

This code

   package New_String is

      type String_P is access all String;
      S : constant String_P := new String'("foo!");

   end New_String;

with 5.02a1, x86 generates code including

   [...]
   new_string___elabs:
   [...]
           call	__gnat_malloc


I think you may be remembering

   package New_String is

      type String_P is access constant String;
      Foo : aliased constant String := "foo!";
      S : constant String_P := Foo'Access;

   end New_String;

which generates (in its entirety) with -O2

           .file	"new_string.ads"
   .globl new_string_E
           .data
           .type	new_string_E,@object
           .size	new_string_E,1
   new_string_E:
           .byte	0
   .globl new_string__foo
           .align 4
           .type	new_string__foo,@object
           .size	new_string__foo,12
   new_string__foo:
           .long	1
           .long	4
           .ascii	"foo!"
   .globl new_string__s
           .align 8
           .type	new_string__s,@object
           .size	new_string__s,8
   new_string__s:
           .long	new_string__foo+8
           .long	new_string__foo
           .ident	"GCC: (GNU) 3.2.3"


-- 
Simon Wright                               100% Ada, no bugs.