TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Mats Weber <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:18:07 +0200
text/plain (23 lines)
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" wrote:

> This is similar to our situation.  I don't believe the CPU overhead of
> streams will be significant, but the coding overhead of converting is
> unacceptable for the short term.
>
> A bigger problem IMHO with Apex is their definition of "representation"
> as used (but not defined) in RM95 13.3(40).  If
>
>    type Demo is range 0 .. 12;
>
>    X : Demo := 11;
>
> then for Apex 2.4.1 Ada 83 model, X'Size is 32, but for Apex 3.0.0 Ada 95
> model, X'Size is 4.  What causes us grief is that the actual handling of
> the object in memory has not changed!  If X'Address is "A", then examining
> the byte at A shows all zeroes, while examining the byte at A+3 shows 11
> in both versions!

Are you sure you are looking at X'Size and not Demo'Size ? Be very
careful with the distinction between T'Size where T is a type and X'Size
where X is an object, they are very different.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2