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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,7767a311e01e1cd X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s72.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Jeffrey R. Carter" Organization: jrcarter at acm dot org User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: AW: GNAT compiler switches and optimization References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.201.97.213 X-Complaints-To: abuse@mchsi.com X-Trace: attbi_s72 1161635349 12.201.97.213 (Mon, 23 Oct 2006 20:29:09 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 20:29:09 GMT Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 20:29:09 GMT Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7177 Date: 2006-10-23T20:29:09+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > > I certainly do not think you should start putting Convention(Fortran) on > all your performance-critical arrays, just to make sure! In the case of records, the representation is up to the compiler unless there is a representation clause. I don't find it surprising that the same is true of arrays. However, as with records, there should be some way to specify the representation for arrays other than a pragma Convention for another language. -- Jeff Carter "Blessed are they who convert their neighbors' oxen, for they shall inhibit their girth." Monty Python's Life of Brian 83