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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,38ceb882eed41e1e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-11 01:59:04 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!pipehawk.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail
From: john.mccabe@emrad.com.nospam (John McCabe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Size and pack
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 08:58:45 GMT
Organization: Emrad Ltd
Message-ID: <3bc55ea1.3939494@news.demon.co.uk>
References: <9ff447f2.0110100005.2503bb00@posting.google.com>
 <slrn9s853b.k4.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <9ff447f2.0110102224.5c470e2c@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pipehawk.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pipehawk.demon.co.uk:158.152.226.81
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1002790735 nnrp-12:22651 NO-IDENT
 pipehawk.demon.co.uk:158.152.226.81
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14227
Date: 2001-10-11T08:58:45+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 10 Oct 2001 23:24:27 -0700, byhoe@greenlime.com (Adrian Hoe) wrote:

>The record structure will be used to interface with COTS product which
>sends out data in specific byte orders. The shuffle is not viable in
>this case.

I thought that may be the case, otherwise why be concerned with the
structure :-)

>This will be intended on 32-bit Intel. What will be the effect if I
>use representation clauses on 64-bit processor?

On a 64-bit Intel processor? It is likely that the layout will be the
same. You may need to be concerned about endianness- although there is
a 'Bit_Order attribute, in my experience a compiler is unlikely to
allow you to specify a bit order that is contrary to its native
ordering.