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=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_NUMERIC_TLD,
	INVALID_MSGID,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d7ae8269a4ecf7c4
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: steved@pacifier.com@199.2.117.163  (Steve Doiel)
Subject: Re: Prevalence of Compilers for Which Integer'Size < 32?
Date: 1996/07/27
Message-ID: <4tdp24$5h1@news.pacifier.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 170465181
references: <dmarshalDv4vLI.D6E@netcom.com>
organization: Pacifier BBS, Vancouver, Wa.  ((360) 693-0325)
reply-to: steved@pacifier.com  (Steve Doiel)
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-07-27T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Dave Marshall writes:
>So here I am, looking at some old code while I wonder what I was
>thinking when I wrote it.  Suddenly, I see something that will raise
>Constraint_Error if a compiler's Integer'Size is less than 32.
>
Sorry for not answering your question but...

In my experience I have found that if portablilty is a concern, then all
predefined types should be avoided.

Ada is one of the languages that lends itself the best to defining your own
types in a portable manner:

  type
    anInt32 is range -21474_83648 .. 21474_83647;

If you want to use a "vanilla" integer.

In many cases it is better to define a range that better describes your problem.

BTW: I've used the same type of definitions in 'C' ie:

typedef integer int32;

Steve Doiel