From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Subject: Gem 39 - compiler specific?
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 13:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
Date: 2009-09-02T13:38:52-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9e0bbbcd-260f-48ed-8043-d6280c633e85@h3g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> (raw)
Consider:
http://www.adacore.com/2008/06/09/gem-39/
The example code performs Unchecked_Conversion between addresses of
two different array types.
As far as I understand, there is no standard provision for arrays to
occupy contiguous memory space (and not even for the alignment of
their components) and such a conversion relies heavily on the
assumption that arrays can be "overlaid" by plain address
reinterpretation.
Still, this technique is quite attractive. What is the chance (in
practice) to hit the compiler that does not get it "right"?
--
Maciej Sobczak * www.msobczak.com * www.inspirel.com
Database Access Library for Ada: www.inspirel.com/soci-ada
next reply other threads:[~2009-09-02 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-02 20:38 Maciej Sobczak [this message]
2009-09-02 23:20 ` Gem 39 - compiler specific? Randy Brukardt
2009-09-03 7:26 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-03 15:26 ` Adam Beneschan
2009-09-03 16:38 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-03 17:27 ` Adam Beneschan
2009-09-03 20:26 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-03 22:06 ` Randy Brukardt
2009-09-04 7:29 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-04 12:07 ` Maciej Sobczak
2009-09-04 13:06 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-04 17:18 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-04 20:34 ` Maciej Sobczak
2009-09-04 22:41 ` sjw
2009-09-05 20:45 ` Maciej Sobczak
2009-09-06 6:54 ` sjw
2009-09-03 21:58 ` Randy Brukardt
2009-09-04 17:26 ` Robert A Duff
2009-09-03 21:53 ` Randy Brukardt
2009-09-03 0:12 ` Adam Beneschan
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox