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: 103376,2203a21a136b39cc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Fortran's Equivalence
Date: 1997/03/29
Message-ID: <dewar.859697511@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 229388495
References: <333840D1.7B12@cae.ca> <5hbcdn$i1h@top.mitre.org>
 <mheaney-ya023680002903971539370001@news.ni.net>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Matthew Heaney says

<<It's all very theoretically interesting about what would have allowed
portability using overlays, but since you should never use address overlays
to change representation>>

Well Matthew certainly seems to be announcing lots of moral principles
tonight :-) But once again, no technical justification.

The use of address overlays to achieve a chnage of representation is a 
perfectly legitimate tool in the Ada 95 arsenal, which is rarely used, but
can be quite useful when it does apply, and can often be considerably
more convenient than the use of unchecked conversion, and no less portable.