From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 26 May 93 18:08:48 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!ux1.cso.uiuc .edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!hawk!billk@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Bill K innersley) Subject: Re: XX(PL/I) to Ada translator/lessons learned Message-ID: List-Id: In article <1993May26.070218.5567@sctc.com> stachour@sctc.com (Paul Stachour) writes: : : Well, not quite true. As an experiment, I translated the same : PL/I code into Ada. Yes, it was still a little wierd. Not as : bad as the C, but still weird. So I compiled the code (no error : messages), and ran a few test-cases. Bamb! Took an exception : (arressing outside the bounds of an array) on the first test. : : Analysis time. Yep, the code is "coincidentally correct". : The element of the array that's out-of-bounds is combined : with other data in such a way that it never affects the : results of the computation. : PL/I also does a runtime check of array bounds. If you have done an accurate translation the behavior should be the same using either language. -- --Bill Kinnersley billk@hawk.cs.ukans.edu 226 Transfer complete.