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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	UNRESOLVED_TEMPLATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ebb3574ca8067275,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-10-28 06:19:54 PST
Path: 
 nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!EUROCONTROL.DE!wel
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Message-ID: <9410281131.AA15384@eurocontrol.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 12:31:54 +0100
Sender: Ada programming language <INFO-ADA@NDSUVM1.BITNET>
From: Bob Wells #402 <wel@EUROCONTROL.DE>
Subject: Access type representations.
Comments: To: INFO-ADA%NDSUVM1.BITNET@vm.gmd.de
Date: 1994-10-28T12:31:54+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

G'day,
Getting back to that thread of using access types to interface with
pointers in C, David emery said that my assumption that the access
type in Ada does not necessarily have to contain the address.

My question is are there compilers out there that do *not* use the
address within the access type for the representation of the allocated
object? If there are, what do they use?

Thanks,
Bob W. (-: