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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,cc7bad83fb245cb3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Binding a type to a union. Date: 1999/11/25 Message-ID: <1999Nov25.091201.1@eisner>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 552933984 References: <383ae9f8_3@news1.prserv.net> <81f3qe$jln$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <1999Nov23.215123.1@eisner> <81ignc$gb$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Trace: news.decus.org 943539126 6753 KILGALLEN [216.44.122.34] Organization: LJK Software Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-11-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <81ignc$gb$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar writes: > In article <1999Nov23.215123.1@eisner>, > Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: >> In article <81f3qe$jln$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar > writes: >> > In article <383ae9f8_3@news1.prserv.net>, >> > "Matthew Heaney" wrote: >> > (pragma Unchecked_Union is GNAT-specific.) >> > >> > No it isn't! >> >> It does not seem to be in the LRM index as published by IIT > Research. >> >> Where else would one look it up ? > > > No one said this was a standard pragma, it is not! All I said > was that it was not GNAT specific. Look it up in the Aonix > documentation, or the GNAT documentation, or the Greenhills > documentation etc. The GNAT implementation is slightly more > restrictive than the Intermetrics one I believe. It must be a _lot_ more _documented_, as I find no reference in the Aonix Annex M section on Implementation-define pragmas (page 1-3 of UD/UG/A0000-05625/001, dated Mar97, the most recent version distributed by Aonix to subscription customers). Larry Kilgallen