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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1ff5003422436e4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-10-29 10:46:35 PST Path: nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!fauern!zib-berlin.de!prise.nz.dlr.de!news.dfn.de!swiss.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!panix!cmcl2!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!nobody From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Easily-Read C++? Date: 27 Oct 1994 19:09:56 -0400 Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences Message-ID: <38pc04$4q2@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> References: <389vqv$i6n@source.asset.com> <38k8g2INNiff@marble.summit.novell.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: schonberg.cs.nyu.edu Date: 1994-10-27T19:09:56-04:00 List-Id: Bob Duff guesses that if you store virtual origins and suppress checks you do not need to pass bounds around. It's tricky, since we intend in GNAT to use virtual origins at some point (it is exactly why we use "fat" pointers for unconstrained types), we have looked into this issue in some detail. The trouble is that there are a number of subsidiary language features that will require the bounds ('Address, 'Access, passing array to a foreign routine ...)