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: 103376,4751d44ff54a2c2c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-08-02 01:36:00 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!bnewspeer01.bru.ops.eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net!surfnet.nl!news.nl.linux.org!humbolt.nl.linux.org!transit.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
From: Fraser Wilson <newsfraser@blancolioni.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: 64-bit integers in Ada
Date: 02 Aug 2002 10:37:46 +0200
Organization: XS4ALL Internet BV
Sender: fwilson@FWILSON
Message-ID: 
 <ufzxxd5b9.fsf@FWILSON.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-shoot-me>
References: <3CE3978F.6070704@gmx.spam.egg.sausage.and.spam.net>
 <Xns925A758E8FB6Avictorgiddingsoiscom@192.84.85.25>
 <wccy9buqoi6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <3D46DC69.7C291297@adaworks.com>
 <5ee5b646.0207301613.5b59616c@posting.google.com>
 <yeceldkpm34.fsf@king.cts.com> <wcc65ywhw3s.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <ai8pf9$fip$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <slrnakhqa5.ok.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <aibbr8$4ie$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: a80-126-24-12.adsl.xs4all.nl
X-Trace: news1.xs4all.nl 1028277359 2035 80.126.24.12 (2 Aug 2002 08:35:59
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Aug 2002 08:35:59 GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27605
Date: 2002-08-02T08:35:59+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:

> Its been a while since I've seen a C compiler for a 6502, but my
> recollection is that the last one I did look at had 16 bits for the type
> int. Please correct me if I'm wrong here - have you seen C compilers for
> this target using 8 bits for the type int?

No, but Ada has a special problem on 8 bit targets -- the string type.
It's obvious that Integer should be 16 bits, but it's also obvious
that using a two byte string index is overkill; one unsigned byte is
plenty.  I'm vaguely planning some compiler trickery, but it feels
bad.  Is that the normal solution to this issue?  Indexing with two
bytes takes about ten times longer than one byte.

Actually, I don't know that a C compiler could do anything at all
about this, since there's no special string type for which index
finangling could be used.  It would be up to the programmer to address
with an int8.

Fraser.