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: 103376,8a4455177648cb9e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Idea: Array Boundary Checks on Write Access Only
Date: 1998/06/20
Message-ID: <dewar.898364644@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 364518243
References: <35851B64.5BF271C4@cl.cam.ac.uk> <6m8v02$r2l$1@xenon.inbe.net>
 <3588D738.4BB32E5A@cl.cam.ac.uk> <6mb7jl$edm$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu
X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 898364687 22799 (None) 128.122.140.58
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-06-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


<<> It would then also be a nice option if the compiler would be
> able to dump a list of all the checks that it still had to insert
> to give developers a clue of whether they can by intelligently
> placing a manual check at the right place make a large number
> of automatically inserted less efficient checks unnecessary.
>>


In fact the RM requires (in annex H) that a fuloly conforming compiler
have some way of informing you of runtime time checks that are inserted.