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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3b4bed4f74b8ac49 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: whiting_ms@corning.com (whiting_ms@corning.com (Matt Whiting)) Subject: Re: GNAT messages and the not operator (pitfall alert!) Date: 1996/10/29 Message-ID: <1996Oct29.145959.1@corning.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 193024932 references: <32762A30.D2D@watson.ibm.com> organization: Corning, Incorporated newsgroups: comp.lang.ada nntp-posting-user: whiting_ms Date: 1996-10-29T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <32762A30.D2D@watson.ibm.com>, "Norman H. Cohen" writes: > Robert Dewar wrote: >> >> Here is another pitfall, pretty horrible if it hits, but fortunately rare. >> Ask an Ada expert what is the value of >> >> -5 mod 3 > > I agree this is a nasty one, and Ada as a Second Language explicitly > warns about it (bottom of page 245), as well as about the only slightly > less insidious Relative to the page 245 warning and the table on page 246, I'm still confused. I'm probably beating a dead horse here, but something still doesn't seem right. If I'm reading the p. 246 table correctly, -5 mod 4 (row 1, column 4, excluding the "header row and column"), should evaluate to 3. However, I just wrote a simple little program using ObjectAda V7.0 which evaluates to -1, which, BTW, is what I would have expected. Taking into account the warning on p. 245, I also tried -(5 mod 4). It does give the identical -1 result. Am I reading the table incorrectly? Matt