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-Thread: 103376,7f18265ce67560b3
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.27.132 with SMTP id t4mr1257595pbg.3.1320706501516;
        Mon, 07 Nov 2011 14:55:01 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 h5ni10233pba.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!x28g2000prb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Memory Access
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 14:53:15 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <4eedb401-d6b4-4b3e-bd2c-584ff3ab2e86@x28g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <f4a52e5d-2514-4713-a68d-877f09af7ec3@d17g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
 <9hr483F3liU1@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1320706500 11446 127.0.0.1 (7 Nov 2011 22:55:00
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:55:00 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: x28g2000prb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122;
 posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: ARLUEHNKC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64;
 Trident/4.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR
 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30618; .NET4.0C),gzip(gfe)
Xref: news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:14333
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2011-11-07T14:53:15-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Nov 7, 2:26=A0pm, Niklas Holsti <niklas.hol...@tidorum.invalid>
wrote:
>
> While waiting for the answers: I hope you are already using pragma
> Convention to tell the Ada compiler to lay out the Ada record types and
> array types following the C conventions.

Or using record representation clauses and other attributes such as
'Component_Size to specify all that.  If the Dev_ in the names means
that the types involved are related to some kind of memory-mapped
devices, then the layouts of the record and array types are defined by
the hardware and not by the C language or C compiler, so using
Convention(C) on such types seems like the wrong approach.

                         -- Adam