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,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e8c8d1c63ffacf0d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com>
Subject: Re: Constraint checking of actuals passed to Attributes
Date: 2000/05/09
Message-ID: <8f99gf$8eo$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 621132022
References: <391250A8.99D1585C@hotmail.com> <39171B69.2F983487@averstar.com>
 <8f93lm$1es$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x34.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue May 09 15:06:05 2000 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.7 [en] (WinNT; I)
Date: 2000-05-09T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <8f93lm$1es$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
  Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> wrote:
> of disk drives. Why? let's read the RM:
>
>    11  If the representation of the object does not represent a
>        value of the object's type, the semantics of operations
>        on such representations is implementation-defined, but
>        does not by itself lead to erroneous or unpredictable
>        execution, or to other objects becoming abnormal.
>
> Unfortunately, implementation-defined is a HUGE hole, through
> which almost any truck can be driven. OK, so it is probably
> not acceptable for an implementation to say:

It does seem that this constrains the possible effects to just the
object in question. To me that means that if I overlay a small object
with a large one, then the compiler has to somehow prevent writes to the
large object from hosing nearby objects. That can't be right.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.