Re: Rep specs

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>]

In article <tqx43.5040$xF2.70329@news1.rdc2.tx.home.com>,
  "Eddy Raineri" <eraineri@axiom-tx.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a question regarding rep specs.  There is an individual
I work with
> that has stated that rep specs are not required by the LRM and
as I qoute
> "DO NOT USE ADA REP SPECS except in the simplest of cases, or
unless you are
> sure that the code will NEVER be ported to a different machine
or compiler
> (hah!)"
>

Rep specs (more properly rep clauses) are not required unless
you implement the Systems Programming Annex. That makes sense.
For the type of thing that needs rep clauses, that annex had
better be implemented. In fact virtually all compilers support
this on virtually all machines. An exception might be a compiler
targetting the JVM, where systems programming is not really
practical in any case.

However, the "individual you work with" is QUITE wrong in
reocmmending against using rep clauses completely. As you
point out in your examples, careful use of rep clauses (as
well as address attributes etc) can greatly AID in portability.
Forbidding these features may very well cause you to have to
resort to low level do-it-your-self stuff which will be much
less likely to be portable.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.