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: 103376,ab43ecf7e1a10743 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!newsfeed.stueberl.de!eusc.inter.net!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail From: Georg Bauhaus Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Zero_Fill pragma Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:12 +0000 (UTC) Organization: GMUGHDU Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1090361712 27813 134.91.1.34 (20 Jul 2004 22:15:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00 (9000/800)) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2293 Date: 2004-07-20T22:15:12+00:00 List-Id: Nick Roberts wrote: : It is important that the 17 bits not defined by the above : representation clause are initialised to 0 in objects of this : type. It would be truly yukky to have to declare another 17 : dummy booleans to achieve this effect. It would surely be much : preferable to be able to just declare: : : pragma Zero_Fill(Flags_32); Hm. Provided the "default status" of unused bits is 0? How many (non-limited) objects of type Flags_32 would you need? (so that an explicit initialisation function for a per-process (?) object is not acceptable)? (There has once been a suggestion to have a rep clause for X use all record ... end record; or similar, I don't remember exactly.)