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,c6e6cdf6ff50e684
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-10 03:41:26 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!supernews.com!216.227.56.88.MISMATCH!telocity-west!TELOCITY!newsrump.sjc.telocity.net!not-for-mail
From: "David C. Hoos, Sr." <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <95tqbh$ag7$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <Ndyg6.1048$y03.96769@news.flash.net> <962mh2$f9v$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Subject: Re: Representation clause for enumeratives
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <GN9h6.83765$Ch.13631332@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>
X-Trace: 
 MjUgUm9BdWhoVXNlcjxURUxTQ0lUWS1SRV1ERVJTIDIxKi4yMjcuKDcuNDkgIFNhdCwgMTAgRmVi!IDIwMDEgMC86NDE6MjYgUE9U
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward ALL headers when reporting abuse.
X-Complaints-To: abuse@telocity.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 03:41:26 PST
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 05:42:20 -0600
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5097
Date: 2001-02-10T05:42:20-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
news:962mh2$f9v$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <Ndyg6.1048$y03.96769@news.flash.net>,
>   "Ken Garlington" <Ken.Garlington@computer.org> wrote:
> > I don't know if either behavior is considered "wrong" by the
> standard. I'm
> > not comfortable with the GNAT behavior, since it treats
> 16#8000_0000# as a
<snip>
> Note that 16#8000_0000# is the number 2**32, it is a POSITIVE

I believe Robert meant 2**31 here.

> number, nothing at all to do with the largest negative number.
> I think the confusion is coming from the use of base 16, and
> suddenly that is translating into bit patterns in your mind???
>
> Any time you write 16#8000_0000# in your program, you could
> equally well write 2147483648. The meaning is 100% identical.
> If the first looks like a bit pattern to you, and the second
> looks like an integer, then that's your confusion, not Ada's
> :-)