From: Tucker Taft <stt@averstar.com>
Subject: Re: A Record Interpretation of an Array
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 14:20:36 -0400
Date: 2001-06-01T18:20:37+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B17DCF4.E866E95E@averstar.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3B178027.BA1CBB00@earthlink.net
"Marc A. Criley" wrote:
> ...
> What I've got here, though, is a low-level debugging aid that directly
> manipulates raw byte streams, and is therefore intimately concerned with
> the layout of data, whether it be scalars, records, or arrays.
> ...
> So the question then concerns the reasonableness of
> mapping a physical Ada array to this same abstract record--with the
> record fields representing array elements.
I would say not bother using a record, but instead consider
using an array indexed by an enumeration type, where the
enumeration literals correspond to the names of the
record fields.
>
> Marc
--
-Tucker Taft stt@avercom.net http://www.avercom.net
Chief Technology Officer, AverCom Corporation (A Titan Company)
Burlington, MA USA (AverCom was formerly the Commercial Division of AverStar:
http://www.averstar.com/~stt)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-01 18:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-28 22:53 A Record Interpretation of an Array Marc A. Criley
2001-05-29 3:29 ` Jeffrey Carter
2001-05-29 13:34 ` Ted Dennison
2001-05-29 14:16 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-31 0:55 ` Keith Thompson
2001-05-31 12:47 ` Marc A. Criley
2001-06-01 1:22 ` Keith Thompson
2001-06-01 0:14 ` Mark
2001-06-01 8:45 ` Ehud Lamm
2001-06-01 12:39 ` Marc A. Criley
2001-06-01 18:20 ` Tucker Taft [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox