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: 103376,49eb370bfd3baa90
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 21:39:37 -0600
From: Craig Carey <research@ijs.co.nz>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Memory limits in Ada where Fortran has none
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:39:34 +1300
Message-ID: <inrs21p0me8tu682jjus7ujpc90ejnomsf@4ax.com>
References: <1110070479.250902.220540@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
 <wccy8d0gw1q.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <pan.2005.03.08.11.25.00.810114@linuxchip.demon.co.uk.uk.uk>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-210-185-6-112.internet.co.nz
X-Original-Trace: 9 Mar 2005 16:16:09 +1300, ip-210-185-6-112.internet.co.nz
Organization: "ICONZ Ltd."
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: news.nz.asiaonline.net
X-Original-Trace: 9 Mar 2005 16:39:34 +1300, news.nz.asiaonline.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.37.6
X-Trace: 
 sv3-cDE6A7XcXpJpQ9Lbf+L4o9YiunzF9s+m3qegvOTqtN5qUtrtw5lZY5sXgf+7S4QT2QkGRjmKOXYCRhx!BpoaXXAk83/TFpP7EfQK/6UwceYcYzj7ty6GmqHTmHCj9l3qJSXv31osYrMUSM0W761ngmfn3cR4!deMxFjY=
X-Complaints-To: Complaints to abuse@clear.net.nz
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: Complaints to abuse@clear.net.nz
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.32
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8906
Date: 2005-03-09T16:39:34+13:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 11:24:42 GMT, "Dr. Adrian Wrigley" wrote:
>On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 19:05:21 -0500, Robert A Duff wrote:
...
>I am very wary of a test like this because GNAT sometimes
>silently accesses the wrong element of very large data, if I
>remember correctly. A correctly written program can (and did!)
>thus fail catastrophically.  Large records in particular are
>suspect (on GNAT 3.15p, x86). (I have no test case to hand
...

It might be a bug in the memory paging code. What's the OS ?.

The Internet does have reports on how Linux gets bytes wrong when
copying files across a disk. Maybe the filesystem the paging is
done to, is a possible cause.

--  Craig