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: 1998/09/25
Message-ID: <6uen3a$f72$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 394550810
References: <6udkcj$87j$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <6udriu$hfi$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6ue3uh$qjo$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x8.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: Fri Sep 25 00:11:22 1998 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/2.02 (OS/2; I)
Date: 1998-09-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <6ue3uh$qjo$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
  matthew_snyder@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> 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.


ALWAYS ask what you really have in mind, don't abstract it
to something you think is similar. An unchecked conversion
of an unsigned_8 type to a packed record with 8 boolean
fields most certainly is perfectly reasonable, and has
nothing to do with converting a stand alone boolean to an
integer as implied by your original question.

Note however that it will likely be implementation dependent
(e.g. endian dependent) which order the bits come out in in
the resulting packed record.

There is no advantage in using your own type instead of
Boolean, you definitely know that when a Boolean is forced
to be represented in 1 bit, then 0 is false and 1 is true.

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