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-Thread: a07f3367d7,6a8952cbe009f3ed
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.180.98.102 with SMTP id eh6mr1740329wib.7.1360469031078;
        Sat, 09 Feb 2013 20:03:51 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 g1ni1983wig.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!85.12.40.139.MISMATCH!xlned.com!feeder7.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newspeer1.nac.net!news.astraweb.com!border2.newsrouter.astraweb.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nrc-news.nrc.ca!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Numerical calculations: Why not use fixed point types for
 everything?
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 23:12:54 +0200
Organization: Tidorum Ltd
Message-ID: <anamimFn39fU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <db7b4d36-6c49-4501-954e-68ecc55c3d32@googlegroups.com>
 <4905b963-0036-4129-8050-fb26ef0154d6@googlegroups.com>
 <32314026-23ae-45b8-a4c5-e589e7d79de2@googlegroups.com>
 <kdttga$83d$3@dont-email.me>
 <64e3c342-d042-40a2-8a16-b1f0cdff9f16@googlegroups.com>
 <91527f7c-0679-4c21-95c7-a07f3fff265d@googlegroups.com>
 <8cc51443-23f6-4736-a862-d0223998fc2e@googlegroups.com>
 <b9aea316-4b79-41ce-987e-746432945e22@googlegroups.com>
 <753a3719-e15f-4626-b3cc-ac76f7ef7499@googlegroups.com>
 <8ee504a6-b371-42ef-a91e-bbb70e3b81d8@googlegroups.com>
 <an93k2Fbg9jU1@mid.individual.net>
 <2665b0e1-0558-45ac-9a26-7eb7a1ecd689@googlegroups.com>
 <an9drdFdmgeU1@mid.individual.net>
 <ee696908-df30-4e46-a9f4-645749d3a388@googlegroups.com>
 <an9uksFhgjpU1@mid.individual.net> <keoohj$a6i$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: individual.net
 uGcKKxxMJxw50UK/NBY2igHdVpAbhWX6V2zKJLmJkSwAH/PKgbL8qKz4uv/7OQtmDJ
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aPKtCGlZq37AaufSAeZvNwPCe+A=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
In-Reply-To: <keoohj$a6i$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2013-02-04T23:12:54+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 13-02-04 18:44 , Jeffrey Carter wrote:
> On 02/04/2013 07:24 AM, Niklas Holsti wrote:
>> On 13-02-04 12:09 , Ada novice wrote:
>>>
>>> When assigning constants, I always use
>>>
>>>     Number : constant := 100.0
>>>
>>> and then lets the compiler decides how it wants to treat the constant
>>> when say multiplying with a type such as integer,
>>
>> (You can't multiply 100.0 with an integer, unless you do a type
>> conversion or define your own multiplication operator.)
> 
> Sure you can.
> 
>    Twice : constant := 2 * Number;
>    Half  : constant := Number / 2;
> 
> are both legal (ARM 4.5.5).

You are right, and I stand corrected: you can compute with mixtures of
integral named numbers and real named numbers to provide values for new
real named numbers, if I've understood that ARM point correctly.

But I also forgot about another thing: you can compute I * Number, where
I is an Integer variable, since Number can be considered to be
universal_fixed, and fixed-point types can be multiplied by Integer.

So what YC said about multiplication of integers and named real numbers
is correct.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
      .      @       .