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,cef1e23795181e0c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Alternate to Unchecked_Conversion - Portable?
Date: 1999/02/24
Message-ID: <7avplr$jl5$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 447722022
References: <36d05e39.0@news.pacifier.com>
 <36d2638e.6427631@nntp.concentric.net> <m3sobxfpwd.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
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: Wed Feb 24 02:54:55 1999 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-02-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <m3sobxfpwd.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>,
  Matthew Heaney <matthew_heaney@acm.org> wrote:
>> A copy doesn't necessarily occur.  If I use a constant
declaration:
>
> procedure Op (O : T) is
>
>   OO : constant TT := UC (O);
> begin
>
> then (I assume) there isn't any copy of the source
object.

I would be very surprised if a compiler did NOT make a copy
in this case, it would certainly be an interesting
optimization if it did not. What is the basis of your
assumption here.

Anyway, this is simply the wrong way to go here, it is
far better to use UC on pointers.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own