RE: Endianness independance

[Lionel.DRAGHI@fr.thalesgroup.com]

| -----Message d'origine-----
| De: Stephen Leake [mailto:Stephen.A.Leake@nasa.gov]
..
| I was not aware that he had made a proposal that required language
| revision. 
| 
| I use a variant of his technique now, with good results (once I
| actually _know_ what the hardware endianness is :).
| 
You are probably speaking of his technique to get Bit_Order attribute effect
with Ada 83 code, presented in the "Endian-Independent Record Representation
Clauses" paper?

I was speaking of "A Proposal for Endian-Portable Record Representation
Clauses", which suggest to get non default bit order support mandatory, and
the byte offset (the number between "at" and "range" within representation
clauses) related to machine scalar instead of byte.

As i understand it, this proposal cause no upward compatibility problem, but
i have no idea of the rework it could cause within compilers. 

-- 
Lionel Draghi.