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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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: 103376,8f62275ace1d51c1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen)
Subject: Re: [Q]: arrays into mmap'ed memory
Date: 1996/09/06
Message-ID: <50pvcv$1c0a@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 178957424
distribution: world
references: <32249A94.4A0A@joy.ericsson.se>
  <507dq7$ftm@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> <ws968606kxa.fsf@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu>
organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
reply-to: ncohen@watson.ibm.com
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-09-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <ws968606kxa.fsf@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu>, guerby@gnat.com
(Laurent Guerby) writes: 

|>    Putting it all together with your comment on access to constrained
|> array, you can simply import mmap directly as returning the Ada access
|> type (using one mmap per acces type) and skip the System.Address
|> stage.

You seem to be assuming that the address returned by mmap has the same
representation as an Ada access type--a dangerous assumption.  The
purpose of instantiating Address_To_Access_Conversions is to avoid having
to make this assumption.

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com