From: matthew_snyder@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Boolean Representation
Date: 1998/09/24
Date: 1998-09-24T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6ue3uh$qjo$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 6udriu$hfi$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com
The reason for my original question is that I'm trying to decide the best
(most portable) way to convert an UNSIGNED_8 to a record type which provides
access to the individual bits. The record could either consist of booleans,
or it could consist of my own bit type (is there a predefined BIT type that
I'm overlooking?). Right now my record consists of booleans and I'm
performing an unchecked conversion from UNSIGNED_8 to the record type. The
option of doing a "for RECORD'ADDRESS use SOME_ADDRESS" is not available in
this situation. Is any use of UNCHECKED_CONVERSION considered "junky coding"?
I certainly would not want to have to do a 'POS on every bit to assure
portability. What's the best way to do this?
In article <6udriu$hfi$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> 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
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-09-24 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1998-09-24 0:00 Boolean Representation matthew_snyder
1998-09-24 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-24 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
1998-09-25 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-27 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
1998-09-28 0:00 ` dewar
1998-09-24 0:00 ` matthew_snyder [this message]
1998-09-24 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1998-09-25 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-25 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1998-09-24 0:00 ` dennison
1998-09-25 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-25 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-09-24 0:00 ` dennison
1998-09-24 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1998-09-25 0:00 ` dennison
1998-09-25 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1998-09-26 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-09-26 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1998-09-27 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-27 0:00 ` null pointer representation (was: Boolean Representation) Arthur Evans Jr
1998-09-27 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1998-09-28 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-28 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1998-09-28 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-30 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1998-10-02 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1998-09-28 0:00 ` Lieven Marchand
1998-09-27 0:00 ` Boolean Representation dewarr
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1998-09-24 0:00 matthew_snyder
1998-09-25 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-09-25 0:00 ` dewarr
1998-09-25 0:00 ` dewarr
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox