comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: BrianG <briang000@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What is the best way to convert Integer to Short_Short_Integer?
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:24:20 -0400
Date: 2010-06-14T22:24:20-04:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <hv6o5i$qaq$1@news.eternal-september.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <24e3f643-5bb5-44c9-89ec-093247f6c194@w12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>

Maciej Sobczak wrote:
>>> Or is there somewhere a public list of such incompatibilities?
>> What incompatibilities, incompatible with what?
> 
> With Short_Short_Integer, of course.
> 
> I will take the opportunity to extend my question: is there a
> "compatibility list" for Ada compilers with regard to all language
> features that are described as optional? Not just Short_Short_Integer,
> but also Long_Long_Integer (just joking :-) ), pragmas, annexes, etc.?
> 
> --
> Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com
> 
> YAMI4 - Messaging Solution for Distributed Systems
> http://www.inspirel.com/yami4

Let me try to make my point again, since you conveniently cut out my 
reference to the actual language definition you're discussing.

What makes Short_Short_Integer an "optional" part of the language?  Just 
because the RM mentions it as an example of types an implementation 
"may" provide (as "names of the form")?  Should implementations that 
provide no "nonstandard integer types" also be listed in your 
"compatibility list", since they are also a "may provide"?

How many Ada compilers implement "type Day is (Mon, Tue, Wed, Thu, Fri, 
Sat, Sun);" listed in 3.5.1(14)?

BTW, what you're asking for (see M (13)) is required to be documented 
for each compiler (e.g. in the GNAT RM 4(13)).  My original point is 
that I've never heard of anyone compiling that for all compilers 
(whatever "all" means -  how could you prove the non-existence of 
others?).  If you could come up with what you would consider a useful 
definition of "all" compilers, and you had the documentation for each 
(which  I presume might require a license in some cases), this shouldn't 
be difficult to compile.  But what's the point? 
Standard.Short_Short_Integer gains you nothing you can't get by defining 
your own.

(Which brings up another question:  What is your "compatible" definition 
of Short_Short_Integer?  There's nothing in the wording that mandates it 
be 8 bits.)

--Half the world cries
-- Half the world laughs
--Half the world tries
-- To be the other half



  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-06-15  2:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-11  1:17 What is the best way to convert Integer to Short_Short_Integer? Adrian Hoe
2010-06-11  2:21 ` Adrian Hoe
2010-06-11  3:14 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2010-06-11  4:26   ` Adrian Hoe
2010-06-11  7:07     ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2010-06-11  8:59       ` J-P. Rosen
2010-06-11 12:28       ` Maciej Sobczak
2010-06-11 19:05         ` Randy Brukardt
2010-06-13  4:26         ` BrianG
2010-06-13 18:07           ` Maciej Sobczak
2010-06-14  7:28             ` Georg Bauhaus
2010-06-14 16:45             ` Keith Thompson
2010-06-15  4:54               ` Martin Krischik
2010-06-22 21:48                 ` Keith Thompson
2010-06-15  2:24             ` BrianG [this message]
2010-06-15 21:21               ` Maciej Sobczak
2010-06-15 23:39                 ` Georg Bauhaus
2010-06-16  1:27                 ` BrianG
2010-06-11 12:31       ` Brian Drummond
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox