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,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5697899e4423465c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewarr@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Boolean Representation
Date: 1998/09/24
Message-ID: <6udriu$hfi$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 394400670
References: <6udkcj$87j$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x13.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Sep 24 16:21:50 1998 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/2.02 (OS/2; I)
Date: 1998-09-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <6udkcj$87j$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
  matthew_snyder@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Is it safe to make the assumption that a boolean value of FALSE will always
> be represented as a 0 and a value of TRUE will always be represented as a 1?
> Will an unchecked conversion from a boolean to an integer always yield the
> same results with different compilers?


Whether true or false, this is junky coding, just use
Boolean'Pos (val) to get 0 or 1 in a for sure portable
manner. Remember that to use an unchecked conversion for
Boolean, you would have to use a 1-bit integer, anything
else most definitely gives an implementation defined result.

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