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,bc7813b85b027ce5,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Matthew Heaney" <matthew_heaney@acm.org>
Subject: 11.6
Date: 1999/11/20
Message-ID: <3836ff5b_1@news1.prserv.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 551024129
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Complaints-To: abuse@prserv.net
X-Trace: 20 Nov 1999 20:06:51 GMT, 32.101.8.71
Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services
Mime-version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-11-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Suppose we have a bounded stack:

  type Stack_Type (Size : Positive) is limited private;

  procedure Push
    (Stack : in out Stack_Type;
     Item  : in Item_Type);

private

  type Stack_Type (Size : Positive) is
    limited record
      Top : Natural := 0;
      Items : Item_Array (1 .. Size);
    end record;

end Stacks;


Now consider an implementation of Push:

  procedure Push
    (Stack : in out Stack_Type;
     Item  : in     Item_Type) is

     subtype Top_Range is Positive range 1 .. Stack.Size;

     Top : Natural renames Stack.Top;
  begin
     Top := Top_Range'(Top + 1);    --???
     Stack.Items (Top) := Item;
  end Push;


Is it possible, because of 11.6 permissions, that the explicit range
check in the marked line can be optimized away?

Another question: if I compile this (or the instantiation?) with checks
off, then will that cause the explicit range check to be omitted?