Re: Is there a better (Ada) way?

[snarflemike@yahoo.com (Mike Silva)]

"Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<3F984AF5.6030703@comcast.net>...
> Mike Silva wrote:
> > "Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<3F96ED50.2040009@comcast.net>...
> > 
> >>>   R16 := R16 + Reg16_t( Integer( PB.offset5 ) mod Reg16_t'Modulus );
> >>>-- the above line works, but is it good Ada, or C-in-Ada?
> >>
> >>    R16 := R16 + Reg16_t(PB.offset5);
> >>
> >>Should do exactly the same thing--but it doesn't.
> > 
> > 
> > Do you mean that the language should have been defined so that the
> > conversion in the 2nd line acts like the 1st, with negative numbers? 
> > Or ???
> > 
> > Mike
> 
> Yes.  I believe that this will be "fixed" in the next version of the 
> standard, but for now you will find compilers that raise 

<good stuff snipped>

Robert, thanks a bunch for your insights.  Although I'm doing this
mostly for my own amusement/edification, I also want to do this
cleanly enough that it "shows off" Ada to those who would never
imagine looking at Ada for bit-twiddling.  BTW, the processor I'm
simulating is my favorite 8-bitter, the ill-fated 6809.  Thanks again.

Mike