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: 103376,427e29f23a651ddb
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!newsfeed1.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Finding out minimal allocation unit
Date: 3 Apr 2007 09:12:46 -0500
Organization: LJK Software
Message-ID: <qGV$hvsM0rkd@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <20070403144350.6c95e085@cube.tz.axivion.com>
 <1175606570.4684.11.camel@localhost>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1175609418 31495 192.135.80.34 (3 Apr 2007
 14:10:18 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 14:10:18 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14766
Date: 2007-04-03T09:12:46-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1175606570.4684.11.camel@localhost>, Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:
> On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 14:43 +0200, Stefan Bellon wrote:
> 
>> Is there a reliable way of finding out the smallest allocation unit?
> 
> FWIW,
> 
>  type LP is -- new ... with
>             record
>                 forward: access LP;
>                 backward: access LP;
>             end record;
>         for LP'Size use 63;
> 
> should make the compiler complain when 63 bits aren't enough.

Doesn't that deal with the size of an access variable, rather than
the smallest allocation unit ?