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: 103376,514627f9964b6e38 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Using the GNAT defined attribute: 'Enum_Rep Date: 1997/09/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 271579805 References: <97082719523509@psavax.pwfl.com> <34147DAB.463@pseserv3.fw.hac.com> Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-09-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Bob Duff says, replying to Matthew < wrote: >Again, the RM does define internal representation, in RM95 13.4 (8). See >also paragraph 8a in the AARM. Ah yes, I had forgotten about that paragraph. Sorry for the misinformation.>> This paragraph means absolutely nothing, let's quote it: 8 For nonboolean enumeration types, if the coding is not specified for the type, then for each value of the type, the internal code shall be equal to its position number. But nowhere is internal code defined, and if you chase it around the RM, you will find it is circular, and you can make it mean anything you want. In no sense does this suggest anything about binary bit patterns.