From: Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com>
Subject: Re: LLQ: -1 a valid boolean?
Date: 2000/05/23
Date: 2000-05-23T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <392B1C0F.1D8DEB3A@telepath.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 8gf1qh$6bk$1@nnrp1.deja.com
Robert Dewar wrote:
> In article <8geplk$10e$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> wrote:
>
> > Ahh, that's a different kettle of fish. I thought the verdict
> > was that this was a valid test, since Boolean'Size is 1, but
> > that assigning it was wrong becuse Boolean_Object'Size > 1.
>
> Boolean'Size is completely irrelevant
>
> What is relevant is that you have an object of type Boolean
> that has an abnormal value (other than 0 or 1), and any
> reference to this abnormal value is erroneous.
Hmm. So you are saying "size doesn't matter"? :-)
Well, at some point, I'd think it would have to. Suppose there's an
exterranious bit set 33 bits away from boolean's significant bit?
Or are you saying that Boolean'Size doesn't matter, but
Boolean_Object'Size does?
--
T.E.D.
Home - mailto:dennison@telepath.com Work - mailto:dennison@ssd.fsi.com
WWW - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html ICQ - 10545591
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-05-23 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-05-19 0:00 LLQ: -1 a valid boolean? Ted Dennison
2000-05-19 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
2000-05-20 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
2000-05-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
2000-05-23 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
2000-05-23 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
2000-05-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
2000-05-24 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
2000-05-24 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
2000-05-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
2000-05-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
2000-05-23 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
2000-05-23 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
2000-05-23 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
2000-05-23 0:00 ` Ted Dennison [this message]
2000-05-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox