Re: Preelaborable address clause?

["Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com>]

Niklas Holsti wrote in message <36C20210.4C8B494B@icon.fi>...
|Rod Chapman wrote:
|>
|> Does anyone know if it's possible to construct a Pre-Elaborable
|> Address representation clause?
|>
|> I find that
|>
|>   A : Integer
|>   for A'Address use System.Storage_Elements.To_Address(16#00001000#);
|>
|> if rejected when pragma Preelaboreate is applied to the enclosing
|> unit, since To_Address is not a static function (LRM 10.2.1(7))
|
|Probably you already rejected this possibility, but I'll state
|it anyway: if System.Address is not a private type on your system,
|you could supply a direct literal of that type, instead of a
|To_Address conversion. Of course, it would not be portable.


But, since System.Storage_Elements.To_Address is implementation-dependent
anyway, portability is not an issue.

I would suggest (to Rod) that if your compiler does have a private
System.Address type (and does not support any other means of supplying a
static address to an address representation clause), you try another
compiler.

|Niklas Holsti
|Working at but not speaking for Space Systems Finland Ltd.

-------------------------------------------
Nick Roberts    "The Prophylactic Didactic"
-------------------------------------------