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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,e1bb40a3d604c4b X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!85.214.198.2.MISMATCH!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: BrianG Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What is the best way to convert Integer to Short_Short_Integer? Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:24:20 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: <3133a7d5-37ec-4db7-94f0-df15b3535af1@k39g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> <24e3f643-5bb5-44c9-89ec-093247f6c194@w12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 02:22:43 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx03.eternal-september.org; posting-host="T7+V4ifb+JMfyy+SzYQkkw"; logging-data="26970"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19/GidPlO9Te8HOAKM0ru0D" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100317) In-Reply-To: <24e3f643-5bb5-44c9-89ec-093247f6c194@w12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> Cancel-Lock: sha1:RAuyy42m6fG+YG0xDqRc7PeXVkU= Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:12712 Date: 2010-06-14T22:24:20-04:00 List-Id: 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