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,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9a441a9594e85d08
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei@online.no>
Subject: Re: Bignum modular types in Ada95
Date: 1998/02/03
Message-ID: <34D74475.6E8F@online.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 321704558
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <34CE568C.55D7E23D@cl.cam.ac.uk> <34CF3E78.F816DB5@cl.cam.ac.uk>
 <dewar.886367046@merv> <34D64871.33EA@online.no> <dewar.886461676@merv>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Jensen programvareutvikling
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-02-03T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> Tarjei said
> 
> <<It would be useless to have this feature if all applications called
> emulation libraries in C. Or if the Ada code was translated from C.
> >>
> 
> Why? What possible concern is it to the user whether they call a library
> written in C or written in Ada?

None whatsoever. I was trying to say that if more or less arbitrary
precision arithmetic were implemented native in Ada it would be a waste
of time if people did not use it.

One reason for not using such a facility even if it were faster than a
emulation library, would be that the descriptions of the cryptographic
algorithms I have seen to date assumes 32 bit C. Of course people less
mathematically challenged than me would have less of a problem.

If Knuth releases anything on these algorithms we will be treated with
an implementation in 32 bit assembly code. So much for computer
science....

Greetings,

-- 
// Tarjei T. Jensen 
//    tarjei@online.no || voice +47 51 62 85 58
//   Support you local rescue centre: GET LOST!