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: 103376,39f3c359196fe8b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-20 11:07:35 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!newsfeed.tpinternet.pl!newsfeed.gazeta.pl!news.onet.pl!not-for-mail
From: "kat-Zygfryd" <6667@wp.pl>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: for x'address or variant
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 20:07:06 +0200
Organization: news.onet.pl
Sender: samael_@op.pl@pl171.poznan.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl
Message-ID: <b7unl6$4hm$1@news.onet.pl>
References: <b7u1jh$p6k$1@news.onet.pl>
 <b7uhb9$4lb72$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <b7ujir$map$1@news.onet.pl>
 <x7v1xzxjg86.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pl171.poznan.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl
X-Trace: news.onet.pl 1050862054 4662 217.99.113.171 (20 Apr 2003 18:07:34
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@onet.pl
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Apr 2003 18:07:34 GMT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:36323
Date: 2003-04-20T18:07:34+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Simon Wright" <simon@pushface.org> wrote in message
news:x7v1xzxjg86.fsf@smaug.pushface.org...
> "kat-Zygfryd" <6667@wp.pl> writes:
> Nick's solution looks pretty good to me, in general anything which
> uses arrays indexed by (1..2) rather than some problem-specific index
> like Nick's, or which relies on 'Address, is at best suspect!

If you say so, I just thought that using a component
would be at least an instruction or two faster than
indexing an array [but I need the array solution also
in some places].
Anyway it could be useful to enable use of unrestricted
variants in Ada 2005, I guess just that programmers using
the feature would need to know what they are doing.
(Which is quite certain since Ada programmers are
very careful, geneticly ;P )

example:

record
    case not_needed_selector is
    when sth => B32: Integer;
    when sth => B8_1,B8_2,B8_3,B8_4:Byte;
    when sth => array(1..4) of Byte;
    end case;
end record;

or something alike, no more explicit typecasts needed in such case

Zygfryd