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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-19 00:42:57 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!wn12feed!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!199.45.49.37!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny02.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030419
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Quality systems (Was: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the
   Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died))
References: <ZpGva.13$1Q1.6@read3.inet.fi>
 <7507f79d.0305121629.5b8b7369@posting.google.com>
 <ln0wa.54$a03.44@read3.inet.fi>
 <9fa75d42.0305130543.60381450@posting.google.com>
 <254c16a.0305140549.3a87281b@posting.google.com>
 <9fa75d42.0305141747.5680c577@posting.google.com>
 <3ec4b1c9$1@news.wineasy.se> <AFdxa.3805$3t6.46222@news.xtra.co.nz>
 <9fa75d42.0305161748.1735fc32@posting.google.com>
 <Ygixa.86459$cO3.5860233@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <URWxa.143$Ov2.92@nwrddc04.gnilink.net>
 <ba9toc$qorbc$2@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
In-Reply-To: <ba9toc$qorbc$2@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4W%xa.28765$cK5.11964@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 07:42:56 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.84.146.112
X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net
X-Trace: nwrdny02.gnilink.net 1053330176 162.84.146.112 (Mon,
 19 May 2003 03:42:56 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 03:42:56 EDT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37500
Date: 2003-05-19T07:42:56+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Vinzent Hoefler wrote:
> Hyman Rosen wrote:
>>C and C++ have undefined behavior on overflows.
> 
> AFAIK only for signed types.

Yes, so? The unsigned types are like Ada's modular types,
with explicitly defined wraparound semantics. I dare say
that if C had not had unsigned types, Ada would never have
gotten modular types.

>>It is perfectly
>>legal for an implementation to detect these and report an error.
> 
> And it will do only if the machine is "limited" this way.

I'm sorry but I don't understand what that sentence means.
What machine? What does limited mean, and why is it in scare quotes?
As far as I know, Ada and C can run on the same machines, so if Ada
can have overflow checks, C can too.