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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,73cb216d191f0fef
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.180.106.161 with SMTP id gv1mr1360749wib.4.1365924814767;
        Sun, 14 Apr 2013 00:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 p18ni60971wiv.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!82.197.223.103.MISMATCH!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!94.232.116.11.MISMATCH!feed.xsnews.nl!border-1.ams.xsnews.nl!plix.pl!newsfeed2.plix.pl!217.153.128.51.MISMATCH!nf1.ipartners.pl!ipartners.pl!news.nask.pl!news.nask.org.pl!news.unit0.net!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is this expected behavior or not
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 18:15:11 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <1cbd0w75c5wzk$.8vco21sptex4.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <c988e09f-8532-4840-9749-b61aa39551b4@googlegroups.com>
 <1gkxiwepaxvtt$.u3ly33rbwthf.dlg@40tude.net> <kjig2j$nof$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <1fmcdkj58brky.bjedt0pr39cd$.dlg@40tude.net> <kjknuu$gc8$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <1bj564vat3q1j$.1s4d00rlzx4ux$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304051405500.30208@debian>
 <4hzv51v872q2$.1imijbwd7heqm$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304051646450.31361@debian>
 <pgrgoxdhtshv$.z253qtbqarkc.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304052103590.31746@debian>
 <dn4au2div7qm.2g8zj4erryhn$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304072012380.2487@debian>
 <1htu9idmcci7x.1vr9eafeivqah$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304080942050.3493@debian>
 <imfrovuxjjo6.6ebpr0pq5kgr.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304081709350.8693@debian>
 <twndfbdczos9.1xd66ntzsoem$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304090848090.10813@debian>
 <ihi0ajan1ehu.iplgjkwsfpii.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304091606430.12289@debian>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: rHWOzyHApalsT5sEUcbvVQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2013-04-09T18:15:11+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 17:20:35 +0200, Stefan.Lucks@uni-weimar.de wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>> You cannot do
>>
>>   X : String;
>>
>> either. String is a pseudo-type?
> 
> This is a straw man argument. String is not pseudo.

Universal_Integer is neither.
 
>>> Again, my understanding is that they are converted before any run-time
>>> operation is performed.
>>
>> Wrong but irrelevant as well, because semantically there is no difference.
> 
> OK, so look at the semantic. Different semantic means the same operation 
> with the same inputs behave differently.
> 
> The following program fragment nicely prints "Smaller or Equal":
> 
>      if  ((Character'Pos('z') ** Character'Pos('z'))
>         > (Character'Pos('z') ** Character'Pos('z')))
>      then
>         Put_Line("Larger");
>      else
>         Put_Line("Smaller or Equal");
>      end if;
> 
> This is really cool -- the sematic of Universal_Integer enables us to 
> perform operations over huge integers without overflows.

It does not, the range of Universal_Integer at run-time is
implementation-dependent.
 
-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de