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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d3b2e17058959a22 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-03-23 05:46:32 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: nntp.gmd.de!news.rwth-aachen.de!news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!ss3!ss5!mjmeie From: mjmeie@ss5.magec.com (Mike Meier) Subject: Re: C++ to Ada95, help please Message-ID: Sender: usenet@ss3.magec.com Nntp-Posting-Host: ss5 Organization: Magnavox Electronics Systems Company X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] References: <3kjd2m$d3t@jerry.rb.icl.co.uk> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 12:28:13 GMT Date: 1995-03-23T12:28:13+00:00 List-Id: Tucker Taft (stt@henning.camb.inmet.com) wrote: : I believe GNAT supports a pragma "Unchecked_Union" (approximately) which : is applied to a discriminated record to make it look like a C : union. : : It is hoped that this pragma will become a defacto standard for Ada 95 : compilers that support interfacing to C. : -Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com : Intermetrics, Inc. I hate to pick a bone with Tuck just after approval of Ada 95. But, if he hopes this will become a defacto standard, why wasn't it just included in the language definition? Mike Meier Magnavox Electronic Systems Company