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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,60fe876e7675f11
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.238.198 with SMTP id vm6mr14790638pbc.3.1328639552122;
        Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:32:32 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 lh20ni271367pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.readnews.com!transit3.readnews.com!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!uucp.gnuu.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:32:28 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
 rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Weird behavior with modular type
References: <op.v9bjzvhzule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <323fa219-509f-4605-95d9-42573655cf9d@i18g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <323fa219-509f-4605-95d9-42573655cf9d@i18g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <4f316e3c$0$6558$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 07 Feb 2012 19:32:28 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 00826065.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=N3L^Tc3YS[<]E=H1Q9`7874IUK<Cl32<14Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;PH:a3g3^Sk1nc\616M64>:Lh>_cHTX3j=1K1kdj3cGk8
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-02-07T19:32:28+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 07.02.12 19:02, Adam Beneschan wrote:
> On Feb 7, 9:24 am, Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57)
> <yannick_duch...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Now, the following, with added "Natural'Pos (...)", did not even compile:
>>
>>     with Ada.Text_IO;
>>     procedure Bug is
>>
>>        type Modular_Type is mod 256;
>>        subtype Index_Type is Natural range 1 .. 3;
>>
>>        E : Modular_Type := 255;
>>        I : Index_Type := 3;
>>        B : Boolean;
>>
>>     begin
>>        B := E < Natural'Pos (10 ** I);
>>        Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line (Boolean'Image (B));
>>     end Bug;
>>
>> That's counter intuitive. I would expect the first to behave as the
>> second, with either a failure to compile or range error at run-time.
> 
> By the way, I don't see any reason this shouldn't compile, although
> offhand I think it should raise a Constraint_Error at runtime (since
> 1024 would be the right argument of a function "<" (Left, Right : E)
> return Boolean and 1024 can't be converted to E without a
> Constraint_Error).  When I compile on GNAT (4.5.2), it says "static
> expression fails Constraint_Check".  This looks like a GNAT bug,
> though, because there's no static expression.  Apparently it thinks
> it's static because it knows the value of I must still be 3 at that
> point, but that doesn't make it a static expression according to the
> language rules, so the program shouldn't be rejected.

This spit for the assignment to B seems to confirm:

      | Node #44 N_Identifier "false" (Node_Id=1727) (analyzed)
      |  Rewritten: original node = N_Op_Lt "Olt" (Node_Id=42471)
      | ...
      |  Chars = "false" (Name_Id=300001085)
      |  Is_Static_Expression = True
      |  Etype = N_Defining_Identifier "boolean" (Entity_Id=12s)
      |  Entity = N_Defining_Identifier "false" (Entity_Id=107s)

-gnatdg gives

   b := false;