From: Alfred Hilscher <Alfred.Hilscher@icn.siemens.de>
Subject: unconstrainted arrays
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:18:52 +0200
Date: 2001-10-17T17:18:52+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3BCDA15C.2976AF2@icn.siemens.de> (raw)
Hi,
I know that I can define unconstrainted array where the actual
constraints are given later:
type My_Array is array (<>) of Integer;
A1 : My_Array (1..10);
Moreover I know a way to use this with structure:
type s (len : integer) is record
X,Y : Integer;
A : My_Array (1..Len);
end record;
PTs : s (10);
But this would add one extra component to the record (Len). Is there a
way to avoid this extra component ? Maybe a pragma or rep-specs ? Its
encapsulated within a package body for HW handling where the extra
component is unwanted.
Thanks.
next reply other threads:[~2001-10-17 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-17 15:18 Alfred Hilscher [this message]
2001-10-17 15:35 ` unconstrainted arrays Lutz Donnerhacke
2001-10-17 16:28 ` Alfred Hilscher
2001-10-18 7:42 ` Lutz Donnerhacke
2001-10-18 11:03 ` Rep spec still not possible Petter Fryklund
2001-10-18 12:44 ` Lutz Donnerhacke
2001-10-18 17:10 ` Jeffrey Carter
2001-10-19 13:52 ` Exactly the prblem, how do we make a known constant value static? Petter Fryklund
2001-10-20 0:04 ` James Rogers
2001-10-20 2:53 ` Jeffrey Carter
2001-10-22 8:11 ` We still don't know how to make a " Petter Fryklund
2001-10-17 16:09 ` unconstrainted arrays Claude SIMON
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox