Re: Static assertions

[Jeffrey Carter <jeffrey.carter@boeing.com>]

Robert A Duff wrote:
> 
> What I meant was that it's better style to use a qualfied expression
> than a type conversion, in cases where both work, because a qual exp is
> less powerful.  That is, why say "Warning Will Robinson: I'm converting
> types" when you're *not* converting types?

Isn't that "Danger, Will Robinson"?

I certainly agree with this advice. One thing that always stopped me
short in my tracks was code with constructs such

   ... + My_Type (3) - ...

apparently written by people who thought that "3" has type Integer (or
perhaps used a compiler with that "feature").

However, is there any reason to write

   Assert_1 : constant := Boolean'Pos (Assert'(Integer'Size = 73) );

rather than

   Assert_1 : constant Assert := Integer'Size = 73;

? Are there compilers that won't check this during compilation?

-- 
Jeffrey Carter