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,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	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: "Matthew S. Whiting" <whiting@epix.net>
Subject: Re: GNAT messages and the not operator (pitfall alert!)
Date: 1996/10/28
Message-ID: <32756A73.50D9@epix.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 192766801
references: <dewar.846162354@merv> <dewar.846163972@merv>
 <1996Oct25.103321.1@corning.com> <dewar.846422332@merv>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: epix.net
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT  (Win16; U)
Date: 1996-10-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
>  
> I did not say that 1 was the right answer, in fact the whole point of the
> post is that -5 mod 3 has nothing to do with the table in the RM about
> negative mods, since this is a simple positive mod, so the answer from
> the table is wrong!!!!!!

OK, so I didn't know enough about the RM to to catch the sublety of your point...
I hate it when that happens!

Matt