Re: type declaration and storage requirements

[Dale Stanbrough <dale@cs.rmit.edu.au>]

In article <hfyK8.40339$wd3.6272305@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
 "martin.m.dowie" <martin.m.dowie@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> I think the argument here is - "Why do you care?"
> 
> The only time you care about such things are when you are defining
> interfacing
> and usually there will be an IDD to define such things (or else there isn't
> and,
> yes, you may be the person assigned to think about such size issues - but
> that
> is not a language issue).

I'm not sure if i've got the wrong end of the stick here, but it seems
to me that it -is- a language issue, because the Ada designers have
deemed to put it -into- the language.

You can argue about whether it is the right decision (and you seem to
be arguing against that). I would disagree - for some languages it makes
sense to go to the trouble to include this information, as it may make
writing portable programs easier.

Dale