From: jsquirek@gmail.com
Subject: Re: What shoudl GNAT do wrt variant record and representation clauses?
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 23:45:13 -0800 (PST)
Date: 2015-02-01T23:45:13-08:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <92cf52a4-e49f-4eb9-a2b0-9f2a97bea182@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49494faf-1e2d-43a1-a2b0-fd25af3850cc@googlegroups.com>
Hey Luke,
The default for all enumerated types is a 4 byte integer is this correct?
I think that since the record is an unchecked union making the ranges of the members different may have caused some undesirable behavior. I might try playing around with unchecked unions and see if I get similar results.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-02 7:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-02 1:29 What shoudl GNAT do wrt variant record and representation clauses? Lucretia
2015-02-02 7:45 ` jsquirek [this message]
2015-02-02 7:55 ` Lucretia
2015-02-02 9:04 ` Simon Wright
2015-02-04 9:59 ` Stephen Leake
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox