Re: Optimizing Boundary Checks

[Brian.Gaffney@myrealbox.com (Brian Gaffney)]

Vinzent Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com> wrote in message news:<bck9e8$i1s1h$5@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>...
> Robert I. Eachus wrote:
> 
> >Vinzent Hoefler wrote:
> >
> > > I can imagine situations (especially with subtypes) where it could be
> > > handy to use the variables' type instead of an explicit type
> > > specification.
> >
> >You will need a better justification than that!
> 
> Of course.
> 
> >But there is one. ;-)  A discrete variable declaration can have an 
> >explict range in its subtype indication:
> >
> >Size: Integer range 0 .. 1000;
> 
> Well, IMO that's bad style anyway.
> 
Vinzent,
   It doesn't matter if you like the justification, as long as you get
the feature you want ;-)

   I would think there would be another argument for this, similar to
the argument for using constants.  Just as you don't want hard-coded
values sprinkled through your code because you might need to change
their values, you may not want hard-coded types since you might want
to change the (sub)type of an object.

   I don't think either of these arguments is very strong, but I can't
imagine implementing this would be too difficult (famous last words!).

                     --Brian