From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 25 May 93 22:44:38 GMT
From: scf16!bashford@ford-wdl1.arpa  (Dave Bashford)
Subject: Re: Packed BIT fields -- any help??
Message-ID: <1993May25.224438.2164@scf.loral.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1993May25.141235.14712@mksol.dseg.ti.com> ddessert@dseg.ti.com writ
es:
>I've run up against an "age-old" problem and hope that maybe someone can
>shed some light on a "simple" solution.
>
>We are trying to pass data memory-to-memory between two machines - a Sun SPARC
>using SunAda (Verdix) and a TI TMX320C30 using Tartan Ada.  Much of the data i
s
>packed into bit fields.  The problem is that the two comilers have chosen
>opposite orders for bit numbering -- Tartan uses LSB = 0, Verdix uses MSB = 0.
>We would like to use the same source code for defining types on both machines
>be have been unable to invent a method for specifying the bits (using constant
s, etc)
>that will compile to the same pattern on both machines.  Using "pragma PACK" d
oesn't
>help either -- the compilers re-arrange and pack differently, too.
>
>We can't be the first folks to run up against this -- has anybody already got
>an elegant (or, at least, workable) way to avoid maintaining two sets of sourc
e
>code, or two sets of type names??
>

I asked this same question several months ago and will send you what I
got if you'll send me your address (ddesert@lobby.ti.com and
ddessert@dseg.ti.com failed).
-- 

db
bashford@srs.loral.com (Dave Bashford, Sunnyvale, CA)