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,b23661223cdab88a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Representation clauses and records
Date: 1997/12/18
Message-ID: <dewar.882502759@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 308468926
References: <347000b1.4909762@news.geccs.gecm.com>
 	<349646A2.1A013246@alphalink.com.au> <1997Dec16.061148.1@eisner>
 	<34979C4A.3C2D3D71@alphalink.com.au> <u90tiqsmz.fsf@davidf-nt.mks.com>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu
X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 882502915 2000 (None) 128.122.140.58
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-12-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


David said

<<I've seen other comments that indicate that the runtime cost of a
call to Unchecked_Conversion is going to be a function call of
some sort, and I have just one question: "Why?"
>>

No, you have not seen any such comments (at least I haven't). Probably the
point is that you misinterpreted comments about the semantics. Semantically,
UC *is* a function call, to which a *value* is passed, and a value is
returned (although there is permission to pass and return by reference in
Ada 95). 

However, saying t 
hat the semantics is that of a function call does not mean that there
will the "runtime cost of a call ...", that is a misunderstanding,
no of course not!