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: 103376,133de21eb82605b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: How do functions return unbounded arrays?
Date: 1998/06/21
Message-ID: <dewar.898439819@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 364717360
References: <358444BA.757121D8@cl.cam.ac.uk>
 <1998061518584100.OAA28557@ladder01.news.aol.com>
 <35865075.9D7DCBD@cl.cam.ac.uk> <6m80o6$9st$1@erlang.praxis-cs.co.uk>
 <35879C27.634A3E0@praxis-cs.co.uk>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu
X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 898439887 16385 (None) 128.122.140.58
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-06-21T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


<<In Ada83, things which you "expect the compiler to handle statically" often
aren't.  Some compilers are better at spotting static expressions
above-and-beyond
what is strictly required by the Ada83 LRM (e.g. XD-Ada).  Some stick more
closely
to the letter of the law and generate more dynamic code for expressions even if
they
_could_ be evaluated statically (e.g. the "old" Alsys technology)
>>


Please do not use confusing terminbology. There are no "static expressions"
other than those defined in the RM (83 or 95). Both Ada 83 and Ada 95
compilers may recognize some expressions (e.g. 'Size applied to a simple
statically declared record type) as compile time evaluable, but these
should NOT under any circumstances be referred to as static expressions!