Re: New limited range type?

[tmoran@acm.org]

>In the case of a (language or implementation defined) attribute, you
>would have to write every calculation such as this as:
>
>X := Some_Subtype'Limit(A + B - C);
>
>Of course, that makes what is going on very clear...
  Sometimes "very clear" conflicts with "higher abstraction level".
If the variables involved were light intensities in 0 .. 255, say,
"Observed := Direct + Reflected - Absorbed;" says what's going
on just fine, IMHO.  If someone wants to be even more explicit,
"Observed := Brightness'(Direct + Reflected - Absorbed);" should
do the job.  It's overkill to say
"Observed := Brightness'Limit(Direct + Reflected - Absorbed);"