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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!rpi!crdgw1!ge-dab!peora!petsd!joe
From: joe@petsd.UUCP (Joe Orost)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Record rep specs for private components
Message-ID: <1634@petsd.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jun 89 16:43:01 GMT
References: <1620@petsd.UUCP>
Reply-To: joe@petsd.UUCP (Joseph M. Orost)
Organization: Concurrent Computer Corporation, Tinton Falls, NJ
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1620@petsd.UUCP> I write:
>We're having a discussion within the posix-ada group about the legality of
>record rep-specs for record components of a private type.  I want to find
>out what current compilers accept.  Can a few of you try this on various Ada 
>compilers (Don't bother if you have VERDIX or SYSTEAM; I tried those):
>
>   package a is
>      type aa is private;
>   private
>      type aa is range 0..1000;
>   end a;
>
>   with a;
>   package b is
>      type bb is record
>         bbb : a.aa;
>      end record;
>      for bb use record
>        at mod 2;
>        bbb at 0 range 0..15;       --Legal?
>      end record;
>      x : bb;
>   end b;
>
Here is the summary:

	Compiler	Legal?
	   V		  Y
	   S		  N
	   D		  Y
	   A		  Y

Looks like compiler S has a problem.

--joe@petsd.ccur.com