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: 103376,4ff929aa5c2b2834
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!208.49.83.154.MISMATCH!uns-out.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!pc03.usenetserver.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ranges and (non)static constraints
References: <ejhgfn$jq9$1@cernne03.cern.ch>
 <1pqs0gcno5o2t.1195tm9yap28b.dlg@40tude.net>
  <uh6ije.uoh.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
  <g2go52hf14qn.16tb2xiy7ilrf.dlg@40tude.net>
  <tc3kje.tmr.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
  <160ziiyah2n7g.5k340gtji747.dlg@40tude.net>
  <khmkje.rec.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 09:17:45 -0500
Message-ID: <uhcwwkfee.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (windows-nt)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Sew46Zjm/v1x+8yGlVSW+8PGARc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com
Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com
X-Trace: 89791455f160b759e00d411453
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7555
Date: 2006-11-18T09:17:45-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Jean-Pierre Rosen <rosen@adalog.fr> writes:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov a �crit :
>> Actually it is not the machine which cannot, but the compiler. Why should I
>> care if an integer would fit a machine word?
> In theory you are right, but in practic you may assume that compiler
> writers are not crazy and want to provide a product that's useful to
> their clients. Although nothing really requires it in the RM, it is
> safe to assume that System.Max_Int is the biggest integer value that
> can be handled by the machine, and that Standard.Integer is the usual,
> efficient integer type.

This is specifically not true for GNAT; all GNAT compilers handle 64
bit integers, regardless of target.

I believe the philosophy is that portability is more important than
performance; if you need better performance, then either pick a better
target processor, or spend more time optimizing the code.


-- 
-- Stephe