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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,4ac8a7e7d3e637dc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-23 18:42:00 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: snarflemike@yahoo.com (Mike Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is there a better (Ada) way?
Date: 23 Oct 2003 18:42:00 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <20619edc.0310231742.3677c91f@posting.google.com>
References: <20619edc.0310221056.4c92d10c@posting.google.com>
 <3F96ED50.2040009@comcast.net>
 <20619edc.0310230857.5da5446f@posting.google.com>
 <3F984AF5.6030703@comcast.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.247.222.44
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1066959720 8459 127.0.0.1 (24 Oct 2003 01:42:00
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 01:42:00 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1569
Date: 2003-10-23T18:42:00-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"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