From: Jeffrey Carter <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>
Subject: Re: From 16 bit to 32
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:40:25 -0700
Date: 2013-01-14T19:40:25-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <kd2fir$pal$1@dont-email.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1b5c0c14-60ec-46ac-b458-9db2503026f4@googlegroups.com>
On 01/14/2013 05:34 PM, Adam Beneschan wrote:
>
> Yes, I wasn't aware of that. It looks like something the OP could
> use--*temporarily*. It still means using non-standard Ada, in effect, so
> even if this helps compile and test some stuff in the short term, I'd still
> recommend modifying or removing the rep clauses.
Even being able to ignore the representation clauses, the OP still has the
problem of why there are addresses in the code. The use of addresses is likely
to be a much more difficult portability issue than unnecessary representation
clauses.
--
Jeff Carter
"No one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle,
do you understand? Even--and I want to make this
absolutely clear--even if they do say, 'Jehovah.'"
Monty Python's Life of Brian
74
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-15 2:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-14 20:21 From 16 bit to 32 Scott Loyd
2013-01-14 20:52 ` Adam Beneschan
2013-01-14 21:09 ` Scott Loyd
2013-01-15 22:27 ` Stephen Leake
2013-01-15 0:14 ` Georg Bauhaus
2013-01-15 0:34 ` Adam Beneschan
2013-01-15 2:40 ` Jeffrey Carter [this message]
2013-01-15 0:44 ` Randy Brukardt
2013-01-15 14:40 ` Robert A Duff
2013-01-15 15:47 ` Scott Loyd
2013-01-15 19:12 ` J-P. Rosen
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox