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,e977cd3ab4e49fef
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: schwarza@gdls.com (Art Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Question about record rep spec placement
Date: 1997/01/23
Message-ID: <5c7tsn$85h@mill.gdls.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 211705287
references: <32E6A985.6C4B@lmtas.lmco.com>
organization: General Dynamics, Land Systems Div
reply-to: schwarza@gdls.com
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



> The way we intend a clients to read this is: You can
> assume that a Message has components Priority, Port, and
> Data, with the types shown. However, there are no guarantees
> as to the size of a Message, the placement of components
> within that message, the number of bits each component will
> use, etc. being stable from release to release. (In some
> cases, of course, you can use attributes to determine the
> current values, but it's up to the client to protect himself
> from changes in those attribute values.)

Why not supply procedures (methods) for setting and retrieving
values of interest within the record? One advantage (of procedures)
is it allows explicit front-end validity checks. Another advantage
may be to allow the type to be private.

art
schwarza@gdls.com