Re: for S'Image use Func??

["Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>]

Le Tue, 11 May 2010 19:17:38 +0200, Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com> a écrit:
> All this is well and good for applications that can work in
> "implementation defined" units of type Stream_Element.
“Implementation defined” here, means “platform dependent”. This is not  
“compiler implementation dependent”, this is “platform implementation  
dependent”. So this is not Ada's fault, nor this one or that one compiler  
implementation, this is just the real world.

If you real world is never something else than file storage element of 8  
bits, then the Assert pragma will never fail and that's all (you will even  
do not need the this Assert pragma at all, which is for greater  
trustability)

> A pragma
> won't fix the problem
No language will fix the problem if you need a 8 bits file storage element  
on a platform which uses something else.

> should it be different than a byte. Granted,
> it will never likely come up on the platforms I have in mind.
So, what' wrong ?

> But I do believe a POSIX friendly version of this should exist.
> Then the entire issue goes away. Under the hood, if the types work
> out the to the same size as a byte, you can capitalize on that
> in an implementation dependendant way.
>
> Anything that makes Ada more posix friendly, helps its general
> acceptance.
Ada is POSIX friendly, and there are POSIX bindings to Ada, as well as an  
ISO standard for the POSIX Ada binding. You are formally wrong when you  
suggest Ada is not POSIX friendly.

Ada will simply not be able to be POSIX friendly on platforms which are  
not POSIX.

You know... even Windows XP Pro is very fat to be POSIX compliant ;) (to  
not talk about prior version of Windows)


-- 
pragma Asset ? Is that true ? Waaww... great