Re: Efficient Matrix?

[Adrian Knoth <adi@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de>]

Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:

> turns it into a binding requirement.  13.1(20) also mentions this.

ACK.
 
> So a standards conforming compiler can get away without supporting any
> representation items at all.  But a compiler that claims to support the
> SP annex must obey 13.2(9).  

    9  For a packed array type, if the component subtype's Size is less
       than or equal to the word size, and Component_Size is not
       specified for the type, Component_Size should be less than or
       equal to the Size of the component subtype, rounded up to the
       nearest factor of the word size.

How does this _forces_ a compiler to set a packed boolean array's
Component_Size to 1? As I understand the paragraph it determines
the compiler's behaviour if the Component_Size of a packed array is
_not_ defined by the user.

> I believe all compilers claim to support the SP annex. GNAT certainly does

Sure.

> So, I claim that a packed array of Boolean *must* have 'Component_Size
>= 1, presuming SP support.

I've not resurveyed all aspects of the RM, especially the dependencies,
but I would, for now, acknowledge.
 
> How about now?  ;-)

I guess I'll send a bug-report. Unfortunately the gcc-bug-database is
write-only at the moment, so to say, there seems to be nobody carrying
much about ProblemReports. 


-- 
mail: adi@thur.de  	http://adi.thur.de	PGP: v2-key via keyserver

Ein Mann ein Wort, eine Frau ein W�rterbuch.