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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ef6ae193cb425dbe
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: arthurw@bigfoot.com
Subject: Re: Data_Error - GNAT -O3 problem
Date: 1998/08/06
Message-ID: <6qcmnc$t8u$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 378549929
References: <6qcdr1$hrp$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Aug 06 16:47:40 1998 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.05 [en] (WinNT; I ;Nav)
Date: 1998-08-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <6qcdr1$hrp$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
  arthurw@bigfoot.com wrote:
> I've found another troublesome quirk in GNAT's -O3 mode -- Data_Errors are no
> longer propagated by the Text_Io packages (it worked fine without
> optimization).

My apologies, this is definitely an open-mouth-insert-foot situation. I reran
the problematic piece of code later and realized this is not the case. What
happened (and confused me first thing in the morning :) is GNAT apparently is
calculating NaNs without optimization, but raises Constraint_Error instead
with -O3 enabled. No problem, it's all fine and legal as far as I can tell.
However, I would like to know why there is this difference in the use of
NaNs, since it really messes with error handling mechanisms.

Sorry for the mistake to anyone who took notice of it.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum