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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,38159b1b5557a2e7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-23 22:02:47 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!pd7cy1no!shaw.ca!border1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 00:02:38 -0600 Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 01:02:37 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Standard Ada Preprocessor (Was: why ada is so unpopular ?) References: <49cbf610.0401170627.79c3dfe5@posting.google.com> <400A9B48.3060100@noplace.com> <400BD4B5.6000307@noplace.com> <400BDB7C.40100@noplace.com> <400D2150.6000705@noplace.com> <400E72F9.8060501@noplace.com> <400FC65B.2020006@noplace.com> <3vioub.jvt.ln@skymaster> <40111AC2.7010802@noplace.com> In-Reply-To: <40111AC2.7010802@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.147.77.160 X-Trace: sv3-EBOcDB0HyxlR/L5AjVAwlkaE2dxbOXP1as8HULk+xoOSbOzhH64din0qFJ955b6DPw9TrDdM/B7E0zU!TrYraKg6kXhSDYXBMeh9sdQob0VPMFXzaPTeWbUijcnScPI936lR57XGDZcIXQ== X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4757 Date: 2004-01-24T01:02:37-05:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > O.K. So there's a trick to get around it. (Do we call this "The Other > Rosen Trick"? :-) Is Name'Image guaranteed to be in a given character > case? (I've not checked that recently & must have forgot.) UPPER_CASE. > That may eliminate one possible problem, but it really doesn't help make > this feature useful. It still only helps at run time and I could have > done that with a package of my own. If it doesn't let you branch around > things that won't compile for a given configuration, then it really is > mostly useless. Is it just me, or is this really an issue? Remember it IS static, which means that it does give you contitional compilation at compile time. What it doesn't give you is the ability to write code that is illegal, and compile anyway if it is not in the (static) execution path. I just never run into this situation unless there is a bug. There is one case that I am aware of where this CAN happen, supplying a value for digits in a floating point type declaration, or declaring an integer or modular type that is too large for the implementation. Of course, I use GNAT. GNAT now supports IEEE floating-point and 64-bit integer, fixed, decimal, and modular types for all versions. That is enough for me. -- Robert I. Eachus "The war on terror is a different kind of war, waged capture by capture, cell by cell, and victory by victory. Our security is assured by our perseverance and by our sure belief in the success of liberty." -- George W. Bush