From: "Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com>
Subject: Re: Conversion of Access Types Question
Date: 1999/01/27
Date: 1999-01-27T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <78od69$b4t$1@plug.news.pipex.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: m390ex6fd3.fsf@mheaney.ni.net
Matthew Heaney wrote ...
|But, are there any
|compilers that actually do have a different representation?
Mine (ThoughtWing Ada, out not soon I'm afraid), when targetting Intel 386
etc. It uses 32-bit offset for pool-specific access types, and 48-bit
segment+offset for general access types.
|Couldn't
|there have been another way to enable this alternate representation,
|such as a pragma?
Or a representation clause. Yes.
-------------------------------------------
Nick Roberts
-------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-01-27 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-01-14 0:00 Conversion of Access Types Question Paul S. Heidmann
1999-01-14 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Paul S. Heidmann
1999-01-14 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-01-15 0:00 ` dewar
1999-01-20 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-01-20 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-01-20 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-01-21 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-01-27 0:00 ` Nick Roberts [this message]
1999-01-28 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-01-21 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-01-21 0:00 ` Tom Moran
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox