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,f924a751f0e5a4b3,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: jeff@thecreems.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Ada83/95 Compatibility
Date: 13 Dec 2005 10:46:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1134499582.913837.213460@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.197.192.194
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1134499588 18976 127.0.0.1 (13 Dec 2005 18:46:28
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 18:46:28 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.197.192.194;
   posting-account=o1Y7HQ0AAAB5Vy7A_brrP41bqxJ6lZBd
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6870
Date: 2005-12-13T10:46:23-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I am porting a large batch of Legacy Ada 83 code to an Ada 95 compiler.

One issue i have hit has to do with the 'size of subtypes. (not that
much of a surprise)

I was well aware that there were some differences to be expected in
this area
(e.g. natural'size being 31) but one thing that surprised me is with
this particular
compiler, even object sizes ended up being impacted.

For example

 type My_Big_Int is range -2**31 .. 2**31 -1 ;
 for My_Big_Int'size use 32;

 subtype little_range is My_Big_Int range 0 .. 255;


 A : My_Big_Int;
 B : Little_Range;

I was not surprised that Little_Range'size = 8


What surprised me was that b'size comes back as 8. I've re-read the
representation chapter again and I think the compiler is probably
within its rights to do this.

Since one can't specify a 'size on a subtype like this it appears that
there really is no way to specify a minimum size for a subtype.

While I obviously with B'size = 32 I am not 100% sure that I understand
the chapter well enough to convince myself that it really is a legal
outcome.

..Also note this is not GNAT (which appears to act as I'd expect for
targets I have access to).