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: 103376,25b9eb5c3a89bced
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Martin Krischik" <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: where exactly c++,c fail and Ada gets thru'
Date: 28 Apr 2006 00:49:13 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1146210553.562353.140540@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1145852356.559455.222600@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1145855124.720029.35280@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
   <e2o2ht$53$1@sunnews.cern.ch>
   <1235818.stAph9vF03@linux1.krischik.com>
   <1146156488.812085.225600@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 138.189.120.37
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1146210560 11957 127.0.0.1 (28 Apr 2006 07:49:20
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:49:20 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; de;
 rv:1.8.0.2) Gecko/20060308 Firefox/1.5.0.2,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=138.189.120.37;
   posting-account=2-0LkQwAAAAQMhPSoYwlMiUmi-6lYh44
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:3977
Date: 2006-04-28T00:49:13-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

REH wrote:
> Martin Krischik wrote:
> > Maciej Sobczak wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, classes are used to define new types. Is there any problem with
> > > this? It is also necessary in Ada if we want to do just a bit more of
> > > what is provided by type and subtype constructs.
> >
> > Say:
> >
> > type Y_Type is range 1 .. 10;
> > subtype X_Type is new x range 1 .. 5;
> >
> > function F (X: X_Type) return Y_Type is
> > begin
> >   return X + 3;
> > end F
> >
> > Now I would expect that an Ada compiler will not insert any runtime checks
> > as X + 3 is allways in the range of Y_Type. However:
> >
> > function G (X: X_Type) return Y_Type is
> > begin
> >   return X + 7;
> > end G;
> >
> > may well be outside the range of Y_Type and if so CONSTRAINT_ERROR will be
> > raised.
> >
> > Now say we have a suitable C++ range template:
> >
> > typedef range<int, 1, 10> Y_Type;
> > typedef range<Y_Type, 1, 5> X_Type;
> >
> > Y_Type F (X_Type X)
> >   {
> >   return X + 3;
> >   }
> >
> > Y_Type G (X_Type X)
> >   {
> >   return X + 7;
> >   }
> >
> > Now anyone up to the challenge to define:
> >
> > template <typename Base_Type, Base_Type First, Base_Type Last>
> > range::operator = (Base_Type right)
> >
> > template <typename Base_Type, Base_Type First, Base_Type Last>
> > range::operator + (Base_Type right)
> >
> > template <typename Base_Type, Base_Type First, Base_Type Last>
> > range::range (Base_Type right)
> >
> > in such a way that it works like Ada - inclusive the *realistic* change that
> > the compiler will optimize away the range check in F ().
>
> I have done this.

I had a look. Looks impressive with all those includes. Looks like one
of thoses templates I never want to debug thrue.

But don't expect me to have found that magic static analysis something
trick. So:

How exactly did you do it?

Martin