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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1054df2e2c490eda
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Q: Memory management
Date: 1996/06/26
Message-ID: <dewar.835838995@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 162401385
references: <9606241936.AA11042@most>
 	<uvvg27kjm35.fsf@chaq.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>
 <JSA.96Jun25133402@organon.com>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-06-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jon replies to Hannes saying

"> The bounds have
> to be stored at the beginning of the array. I think that X'Address
> would give you the address of the location where the bounds are stored.

Or maybe a dope vector or ..."

In GNAT, you will always get the address of the first element of the
array. This behavior is required for the type Interfaces.C.char_array,
and it seems reasonable to extend it to all unconstrained array types.