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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,71c41b6f4d72158c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-07-13 15:09:15 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: if X in 1..35000 versus Boolean Date: 13 Jul 2002 15:09:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0207131409.38d01ee3@posting.google.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1026598155 20715 127.0.0.1 (13 Jul 2002 22:09:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Jul 2002 22:09:15 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27069 Date: 2002-07-13T22:09:15+00:00 List-Id: Christopher Browne wrote in message news:... > The size of the object code increased by 20 bytes, so it > evidently changed _something_. I'll bet that it created > an anonymous enumeration type, and that some extra code > is describing/referencing that. As more than one person has pointed out, there is no enumeration type in sight (your understanding of enumeration types is quite flawed, as shown by your example, you might want to get hold of an online Ada tutorial to learn about these matters). As for the extra code you are adding a test, your original only tests an upper bound so of course testing both bounds takes more. Though very little more with a decent compiler. If you really got 20 bytes more, then either you have a junk compiler, or you are misusing the compiler you have (e.g. running in -O0 mode with GNAT, which is of course ludicrous if you are interested in reducing the amount of generated code :-)