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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,bd3300f3a56e7f45 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-18 22:46:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail From: Martin Krischik Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: different compilers: different standard types????? Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:42:00 +0100 Organization: AdaCL Message-ID: <4815140.bajUsJAKKl@linux1.krischik.com> References: Reply-To: krischik@users.sourceforge.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1079678602 07 27105 MTUkGIDreFQ8NR 040319 06:43:22 X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@t-online.de X-ID: EGeyC-ZXYeYuoMgQ8MEi1zkba1bdxG7Dmohref2cb3e3b3h3tyiUoE User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6432 Date: 2004-03-18T18:42:00+01:00 List-Id: Georg Bauhaus wrote: > Marius Amado Alves wrote: > : So if you want to define an integral type with a greater range than (the > : associated with) 32 bits, you have to use Long_Long_Integer as a base. > : But then you hinder portability, because Long_Long_Integer is not > : standard. > > would this work: > > procedure l is > > type LI is range 0 .. 2**40 - 1; > > x: LI; > > begin > x := 2 ** 34; > end l; I don't know about your compiler but GNAT will accept anything up to 2**64-1. With Regards Martin -- mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net http://www.ada.krischik.com