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: 103376,9e2776c05028676e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Why Ada is not the Commercial Lang of Choice Date: 1997/06/28 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 253186982 References: <33A7FBFF.29D2@mitre.org> Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Eachus said << Gee, didn't I put enough smileys around? My point was that if addresses over three Gig are hard-wired, the compiler should support such explicit nonsense. >> It is perfectly reasonable to have virtual addresses this large. And perfectly reasonable to have address clauses for such virtual addresses. It i9s not however, ever a reasonable expectaion to have ANY literals for addresses, since address is most likiely a private type if the recommendation of the RM is followed.