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,b9c1962801ad6b73 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-22 19:07:39 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!iad-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!newsfeed.vmunix.org!news-peer.gradwell.net!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 05:43:49 +0500 References: Organization: Extreme Code Software (http://ex-code.com) Subject: Re: Fussy Standard: what is modulo Address? Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Newsreader: knews 1.0b.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-URL: http://www.ex-code.com/ Message-ID: <3e2f5c7a$0$33931$bed64819@news.gradwell.net> NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Jan 2003 03:07:38 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.149.39.13 X-Trace: 1043291258 news.gradwell.net 33931 mail2news/195.149.39.13 X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@gradwell.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:33363 Date: 2003-01-23T03:07:38+00:00 List-Id: In article , Robert A Duff writes: > porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes: > >> > I don't think so. "Modulo" means the "mod" operator for >> > System.Address. This is defined in 13.7.1(8). The AARM states this >> > explicitly in 13.3(24.b) and 13.7.1(11.b). >> >> So, it is stated nly in AARM, not in ARM? It is a bug. > > The reason I put it in the AARM only is that I thought it was obvious > what it must mean. What else could "address modulo mumble" mean besides > the "mod" operator on type Address? So I disagree that it's a bug. It also may mean about the value of 'Address attribute which is universal integer, not System.Address. >> > The manual does not define the semantics of this "mod" operator. How >> > could it? Address is just a private type provided by the implementer -- >> > it could be anything. >> >> The manual should define relations between System.Address and >> System.Storage_Element.Integer_Address. To define these seems being >> just forgotten. No these relations which should be true accordingly >> human intuition may have bad impact on reliability. > > I don't see the problem here. Type Address and Integer_Address are too > hardware-dependent to say much about them (or the relationships between > them) in the RM. IMO, it should be "A mod M = System.Storage_Element.To_Integer(A) mod M" for any A of type System.Address and integer M (probably with some restrictions related to memory segments...)