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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5e54ec0ce937978
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-in.ntli.net!newsrout1-win.ntli.net!ntli.net!news.highwinds-media.com!xara.net!gxn.net!194.159.246.34.MISMATCH!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@mac.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: String literals and wide_string literals - how?
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:45:06 +0100
Organization: Pushface
Message-ID: <m2d51weo9p.fsf@mac.com>
References: <1177063665.093083.241580@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>
 <wccbqhjw0we.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <vSaWh.5939$n_.5043@attbi_s21>
 <m2lkgmdpz3.fsf@mac.com> <u5yWh.7935$n_.7293@attbi_s21>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1177235106 26293 62.49.19.209 (22 Apr 2007 09:45:06
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:45:06 +0000 (UTC)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rJnnCL+tuxAtgCFtbmrW6adv+go=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.95 (darwin)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15217
Date: 2007-04-22T10:45:06+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Jeffrey R. Carter" <jrcarter@acm.org> writes:

> Simon Wright wrote:
>>
>> Well, on a PowerPC Z is 2#00001111# but I suspect you'd get a
>> different answer on a little-endian machine ..
>
> Actually, that's on a PowerPC with your specific compiler. Another
> compiler might give a different result for the same
> target. 2#00110011# is a perfectly acceptable result. That's why
> this kind of thing, while interesting, is not very useful.

It may not be useful but in some applications it's essential to know.

And it seems to me that a compiler that thought 2#00110011# was
acceptable probably wouldn't itself be acceptable.