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: 103376,71dcb452eafb5045
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Ada enumerations
Date: 1997/12/11
Message-ID: <dewar.881883499@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 297385837
References: <348EDDC9.794B@hso.link.com> <dewar.881792609@merv>
 <34901D71.FD118790@elca-matrix.ch>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu
X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 881883628 5183 (None) 128.122.140.58
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-12-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Mats Weber said

<<Isn't Unchecked_Conversion approximately like doing

   X : Enum;
   I : Integer;

   for I'Address use X'Address;
>>

OUCH! I sure hope not, that would be a horrible approach for scalars, since
it would force them into memory. It is hard to believe any compiler is that
stupid, but you never know.

In practice, all the compilers I have worked with do the sensible thing
when converting scalar types, i.e. zero or sign extend as appropriate,
and truncate at the most significant end if necessary. This is most
certainly what GNAT does.