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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,be7fa91648ac3f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!atl-c03.usenetserver.com!pc01.usenetserver.com!ALLTEL.NET!not-for-mail Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 08:31:01 -0500 From: "Marc A. Criley" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Large arrays (again), problem case for GNAT References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.com Organization: UseNetServer.com X-Trace: f0628425d1efea13cf65619444 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10419 Date: 2005-04-13T08:31:01-05:00 List-Id: Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article , "Dr. Adrian Wrigley" writes: > >> >>Can someone test this on later versions of GNAT please? > > > Later than what ? Probably this: >> -- This test case illustrates a problem with code >> -- compiled on GNAT 3.15p for x86 under Linux