Re: The right way to handle this difference in Ada

["Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net>]

Marius Amado Alves wrote:

> For some reason in this part of the reply Steve has regressed to what he 
> himself calls "C/C++ thinking". Original Poster, ignore.

I think Steve admitted as much:

>  Since you indicated your background is C++, I'm guessing you want the type
> to behave more like an unsigned value in C++ and ignore out of range
> conditions.  If that is the case, change your definition to...

There are cases where an Ada programmer will use a modular type, because 
modular behavior is desired.  Marius' point is that not wanting to think 
about error conditions is poor Ada practice, I assume, not that modular 
types should be considered evil.

-- 

                                           Robert I. Eachus

"The flames kindled on the Fourth of July, 1776, have spread over too 
much of the globe to be extinguished by the feeble engines of despotism; 
on the contrary, they will consume these engines and all who work them." 
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1821