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=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 18 Aug 93 01:53:27 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.
reston.ans.net!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!network.ucsd.edu!news.cerf.net!shrike.irvin
e.com!adam@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Adam Beneschan)
Subject: Re: Data Overlays
Message-ID: <CBxML4.C64@irvine.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1993Aug17.202435.20364@iplmail.orl.mmc.com> rgilbert@orl.mmc.com 
(Bob Gilbert) writes:

>   The problem I have with using Unchecked_Conversion is that I beleive that
>   it produces an additional copy of the data. . . .

Only if you're using an inferior compiler.  A good compiler should
recognize Unchecked_Conversion and use it to treat the data at
whatever address as an object of whatever type.  It shouldn't generate
a copy or any other code.

Check the code your compiler is producing.  If it's generating code to
copy the object, call your compiler vendor and bawl them out for
stupidity.  :-)  (Don't mind me, I'm in an intolerant mood today.)

                                -- Adam

--
The above opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Irvine Compiler Corporation.