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-Thread: 103376,b657b1c99e7e7039
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: sjw <simon.j.wright@mac.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: bit numbers in packed arrays of Boolean
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <b90e6732-5707-481e-aafc-127e908f6fc7@v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>
References: <82r5hfghjr.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <8e4b6rF1dlU1@mid.individual.net>
 <op.viayuwspule2fv@garhos> <108mw0hcfwlnl.1klsp2e3omofa.dlg@40tude.net>
 <op.via1l2k9ule2fv@garhos>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 20.133.0.13
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1283263023 26506 127.0.0.1 (31 Aug 2010 13:57:03
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:57:03 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com; posting-host=20.133.0.13;
 posting-account=_RXWmAoAAADQS3ojtLFDmTNJCT0N2R4U
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.8)
 Gecko/20100722 Firefox/3.6.8,gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13876
Date: 2010-08-31T06:57:03-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Aug 31, 2:40=A0pm, Yannick Duch=EAne (Hibou57)
<yannick_duch...@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> A tricky and imaginary example by the way: imagine a clever compiler with=
 =A0
> clever optimization, which would detect the application mostly access the=
 =A0
> nth item of the array and far less oftenly access any other items, now le=
t =A0
> say the target CPU has a special instruction to access bit value at #0 =
=A0
> (common practice on CISC processor), then it could choose to map this nth=
 =A0
> item on bit #0.
>
> Do you feel the language would disallow such an optimization ? if it does=
 =A0
> not, this example shows this is implementation defined.

I think this would be a very bad idea. My first reaction involved
"deserving a good kicking", perhaps that's a little extreme.