From: defaria@hpcladb.HP.COM (Andy DeFaria)
Subject: Re: Re: "limitations" of conditional compilation
Date: 15 Dec 89 20:05:53 GMT [thread overview]
Message-ID: <920016@hpcladb.HP.COM> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 7398@hubcap.clemson.edu
> Hmmm... how about:
>
> ALIGNMENT_LENGTH : constant := 2; -- or 4, or whatever...
>
> for RECORD_1 use
> record
> FIELD_1 at 0 * ALIGNMENT_LENGTH range 0..15;
> FIELD_2 at 1 * ALIGNMENT_LENGTH range 0..15;
> ...
> end record;
>
> The general form of the "at" expression seems to qualify as a
> static_simple_expression (by 4.9.7 & 4.4.2, plus a similar
> example is given in 13.4.9), and the coding of the for clause
> would seem to be relatively straightforward.
It's the old "who came first? the chicken or the egg" syndrone. How do you
define ALIGNMENT_LENGTH? Its 2 on some machines and 4 on others.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1989-12-15 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1989-12-11 2:02 limitations on optimizers for conditional compilation Emery
1989-12-11 15:58 ` "limitations" of " William Thomas Wolfe, 2847
1989-12-12 21:10 ` Sun Visualization Products
1989-12-13 17:33 ` Andy DeFaria
1989-12-14 20:56 ` William Thomas Wolfe, 2847
1989-12-15 20:05 ` Andy DeFaria [this message]
1989-12-11 20:10 ` limitations on optimizers for " Robert Munck
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox