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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6339fea48a1b8cda
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Mike Silva <snarflemike@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Enumeration representation clause surprise.
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <0d642988-cb65-412d-88b2-806e1a5b0ff3@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
References: <g2odf9$3um$1@nntp.ilk.net>
 <0cbb6daf-01e9-40f5-855c-4f1d45cb0096@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
	<g2oi22$cae$1@nntp.ilk.net> <87abhs6qyj.fsf@willow.rfc1149.net>
	<55613982-679e-419d-8656-03b549393289@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
	<871w346k4j.fsf@willow.rfc1149.net>
 <4a84770f-e273-41ad-a8ef-f22a9896b544@i36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
	<48502e38$0$23821$4f793bc4@news.tdc.fi> <g2qnmq$9r6$1@nntp.ilk.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.51.178.124
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1213289025 12915 127.0.0.1 (12 Jun 2008 16:43:45
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:43:45 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: 34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.51.178.124;
	posting-account=QgO_5wkAAACZKtAvkb3f1VNDm9C58qLr
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1;
	.NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506;
 .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:674
Date: 2008-06-12T09:43:45-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jun 12, 4:45=A0am, Markus Schoepflin <nos...@no.spam> wrote:
>
> Both GNAT and Dec Ada return 1 and 2 for both A1 and A2, so they are
> correctly debiasing when explicitly asked for the internal representation.=

>
> Markus

Now I'm really confused.  In your OP you showed some "incorrect"
binary values - how did you get those values?  By inspecting memory?

Now you talk about explicitly asking for the internal representation.
What does that mean exactly?

Are you saying now that there's no problem after all?

Mike