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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,df40d0d1975a16a6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-13 05:48:39 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.algonet.se!algonet!newsfeed1!bredband!uio.no!uninett.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail
From: Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Optimizing Boundary Checks
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:48:38 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology
Message-ID: <slrnbeji0e.in.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
References: <slrnbejegn.in.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <20030613140324.0000372e._elh_@_terma_._com_>
 <slrnbejhll.in.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no
X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1055508518 11284 129.241.83.78 (13 Jun 2003
 12:48:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:48:38 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39104
Date: 2003-06-13T12:48:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Preben Randhol wrote:
> Erlo Haugen wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:49:03 +0000 (UTC)
>> Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> After reading some posts here lately I have understood that the compiler
>>> can optimise out boundary checks on say arrays if you do this:
>>> 
>>>    type Index_Range is range 1 .. 10;
>>>    type Items is array (Index_Range) of Natural;
>>> 
>>> But if you write:
>>> 
>>>    type Items is array (1 .. 10) of Natural;
>>> 
>>> is boundary checks then on?
>> 
>> Yes, but in this case (principally) every acces to the array has to be
>> checked, whereas in the former case, the index is guaranteed to be
>> within range.
> 
> I see. This is because the boundary checks are on the Index_Range type
> and thus one do not need them on Items too.
> 
> How is it if Index_Range was defined as a subtype of Integer?

Reason for asking is that I get:

t.adb:10:11: warning: value not in range of subtype of "Standard.integer" defined at line 6
t.adb:10:11: warning: "constraint_error" will be raised at run time

if I do:

   type Items is array (1 .. 10) of Natural;
   Boxes : Items;

begin
   
   Boxes(11) := 1;


-- 
Preben Randhol                    http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/