Re: System.Address'Size - not a static integer expression?

[dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)]

Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen <oleh@vlinux.voxelvision.no> wrote in message news:<7vlmbgks2a.fsf@vlinux.voxelvision.no>...
> dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:
 
> Close, but no cigar :-)
> I suggest you look up the keyword 'static' in the C standard.

What I was referring to is the use of static for a local variable in
a function as in:

   int x () {
      int y;
      static int z;
      ...

z will be allocated statically, just like an OWN variable in Algol-60.
This is certainly a useful capability in some form (and indeed we often
see as an FAQ in CLA "is there an equivalent of static in Ada" [canonical
answer "yes, use package body variables" [this actually should be "no,
but you can use PB variables to get more or less the same effect -- the
Ada approach lacks the semantics of the Algol-60 OWN or the C static in
that the variable in question has a reach that is greater than the function,
whereas in C/A60, the variable has a scope that is greater, but the reach
is restricted.

I use scope here to talk about the lifetime of the variable, and reach to
refer to the places where it can be referenced.

Yes, I know that the keyword static in C has other uses by extension, which
indeed may be what Wes found confusing, but the above is the fundamental
motivation for the choice of the keyword static in my view.