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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,db88d0444fafe8eb
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!koehntopp.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.belwue.de!LF.net!news.enyo.de!not-for-mail
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Surprise in array concatenation
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 10:02:05 +0200
Message-ID: <87fyspgqrm.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
References: <1125544603.561847.32140@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
	<14muavojz308w.1ouv7xin79rqu$.dlg@40tude.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: albireo.enyo.de 1125561753 17785 212.9.189.177 (1 Sep 2005 08:02:33
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: 
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7tFSK8KduA5ceuDpccu/ARUwMOc=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4360
Date: 2005-09-01T10:02:05+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

* Dmitry A. Kazakov:

> A more interesting question is why Empty'First does not raise any
> exception. After all, there is no any lower bound of an empty index range.
> Provided, that empty arrays are all same, of course. If not, then another
> interesting question would appear: how to make an empty array with the
> lower bound Integer'First?

You can't.  Even more problematic is the empty array whose index type
is an enumeration type with just one enumeration literal.