From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
Subject: Re: Should representation clauses be complete for each bit?
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 11:43:22 +0200
Date: 2011-07-21T11:43:23+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4e27f4ba$0$6584$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b3cb81ff-3e7f-4ff2-aa83-fa7de9814eab@dp9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
On 21.07.11 09:37, Martin wrote:
> On Jul 20, 6:28 pm, Robert A Duff <bobd...@shell01.TheWorld.com>
> wrote:
>> Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauh...@futureapps.de> writes:
>>> On 20.07.11 16:51, Robert A Duff wrote:
>>
>>>> By the way, I find Ada's representation clauses to be at the wrong
>>>> level of abstraction. Why can't I just write a single line of code
>>>> that means "put all the components in declaration order with no gaps
>>>> in between"?
>>
>>> Is this a frequent use case?
>>
>> Yes, I think so.
>>
>> - Bob
>
> I think you're right, Bob. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it's very,
> very common.
> -- Martin
More specifically, if the original example of "not all bits used and some
gaps between them" is unusual, is it so
- when mapping to a set of hardware pins, say?
- or when "interfacing" to C structs?
For C structs, declaration order seems very convenient, as C keeps
declaration order. But C may well introduce gaps between structure
components whenever its alignment rules requires. Then I will want
gaps in Ada, too. Is a convention pragma sufficient, then?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-21 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-20 10:34 Should representation clauses be complete for each bit? okellogg
2011-07-20 14:51 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-20 15:24 ` Georg Bauhaus
2011-07-20 17:28 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-21 7:37 ` Martin
2011-07-21 8:22 ` Simon Wright
2011-07-21 14:58 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-23 0:13 ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-27 14:12 ` okellogg
2011-07-28 0:03 ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-21 9:43 ` Georg Bauhaus [this message]
2011-07-21 15:06 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-31 15:02 ` BrianG
2011-07-21 21:11 ` Brian Drummond
2011-07-21 7:59 ` Stephen Leake
2011-07-20 15:29 ` okellogg
2011-07-20 16:24 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2011-07-20 16:58 ` okellogg
2011-07-20 19:38 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2011-07-20 17:27 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-20 19:14 ` okellogg
2011-07-20 20:13 ` J-P. Rosen
2011-07-20 21:23 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-20 21:21 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-21 8:02 ` Stephen Leake
2011-07-21 8:00 ` Stephen Leake
2011-07-21 7:36 ` Martin
2011-07-22 23:50 ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-23 2:16 ` tmoran
2011-07-23 15:12 ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-26 21:10 ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-23 0:01 ` Randy Brukardt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1998-04-17 0:00 Should Representation Clauses " Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96
[not found] <3533C3C5.3F25CB91@cacd.rockwell.com>
1998-04-16 0:00 ` Stephen Leake
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox