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,a88e582de42cdc9b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wns14feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s21.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@acm.nospam.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Bug in Ada (SuSe 10.2) ?
References: <0_mdna0iHpIsCifaRVnzvQA@telenor.com>
 <47ba9867$0$21892$4f793bc4@news.tdc.fi>
 	<dN2dndl3zoW5Oifa4p2dnAA@telenor.com>
 <dbe54d78-5bd2-4ad0-ab93-f00b099ae5a3@64g2000hsw.googlegroups.com>
 	<spCdnTyCKpCfvSHaRVnzvQA@telenor.com>
 <3a281192-2744-4110-9fc1-90c155c9436b@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <3a281192-2744-4110-9fc1-90c155c9436b@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <qm_uj.42460$yE1.36921@attbi_s21>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.201.97.213
X-Complaints-To: abuse@mchsi.com
X-Trace: attbi_s21 1203532310 12.201.97.213 (Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:31:50 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:31:50 GMT
Organization: AT&T ASP.att.net
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:31:50 GMT
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19915
Date: 2008-02-20T18:31:50+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Adam Beneschan wrote:
> 
> That would perhaps be taking things too far.  I'm sure the reason that
> this "safe mode" is not the default is because the needed overflow
> checks are relatively expensive, depending on the processor.  It's a
> trade-off.  But Ada is intended to be a tool to be put to practical
> use, not a statue for us to all gather around and admire its purity of
> spirit.

I think that was true originally, on certain processors, but I think it's not 
still true. I never accepted that it was a valid reason for the defaults not to 
be Ada. The simple explanation is that GNAT, by default, is not an Ada compiler. 
You need at a minimum -gnato and -fstack-check for it to be so.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"English bed-wetting types."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail
15