Re: Ada exception block does NOT work?

[Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>]

Robert A Duff wrote:

> I'd use "Integer" for what Lisp calls "bignums" -- integers that can
> grow without bound (except of course you can run out of memory,
> but that's true of Strings and whatnot, too.  I'd call the integer type
> that is based on the hardware (e.g. 32-bit integers) "Machine_Integer".

That's a universal integer in Ada - and indeed the universal integer is not
visible anywhere in Ada.

And integer ranges that can grow without bound are not disallowed in Ada. If
you want you can create an Ada implementation that works that way.

It's like the garbage collector - the Ada vendors didn't think its needed,

> And I wouldn't put it in a package called "Standard" and I wouldn't
> make it automatically visible everywhere.

Standard.Integer  is needed for Standard.String - There is no need to
support Strings which are larger then available memory.

Martin
-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
Ada programming at: http://ada.krischik.com