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: 103376,45a9122ddf5fcf5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Rules for Representation of Subtypes Date: 1996/09/28 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 185843436 organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-09-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Keith said "(Publicly disputing Robert Dewar is always dangerous. Fortunately it's a bounded error; the effect is limited to learning something.)" Actually Keith has a pretty good track record in such disputes, he is seldom wrong :-) Well in fact I don't see a significant dipute here, I agree with everything Keith said. The one interesting additional piece of information is that there is another compiler besides Intermetrics that made Natural'Size 31. I certainly am aware that Alsys makde Natural'Size be 31, and I am (painfully, because it causes some compatibility problems for some of our customers) aware that Verdix made Natural'Size 32. Keith for interest which compiler made natural'Size 31? It's interesting to know, since it means that the Ada 95 decision is more justified (i.e. we had a chaotic non-portable situation in Ada 83, and Ada 95 eliminated the non-portability, but was bound to cause some incompatibilities for certain implementations when it did so.