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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Markus_Sch=c3=b6pflin?= <no.spam@spam.spam>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Addressing in Object Ada v/s GNAT (2013) showing Vast Differences
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 09:12:54 +0200
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <msm1pl$f40$1@speranza.aioe.org>
References: <d9a8f605-fbcf-43bf-a53f-91c7f7608461@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: MdpKeRr+sx3LK7JQiK5aNw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:27738
Date: 2015-09-08T09:12:54+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Well, we're using GNAT on Linux (32 & 64 Bit) and do a lot of binary record 
layout fiddling, and never had any problems.

For example, our layout specifications (for a variant record in this case) 
look like this:

  for RECORD_T use record at mod 2;
    A1 at 0 range 0 .. 0;
    A2 at 0 range 1 .. 7;
    B  at 2 range 0 .. B_SIZE*8-1;
    C  at 2 range 0 .. C_SIZE*8-1;
  end record;

I guess yours are looking similar?

Markus