From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Default rep specs for record types - documented??
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 05:14:10 -0500
Date: 2005-11-05T05:14:10-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <uvez7766l.fsf@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: op.szqzwuei5afhvo@localhost
"Ed Falis" <falis@verizon.net> writes:
> But if you order the components the same in both languages, and use
> pragma Convention (C, ...) on the Ada side, the Ada record layout
> will match the C struct layout.
This has always bothered me, because it is so poorly defined.
Which C compiler? With which settings of the various layout options?
If I'm compiling with GNAT, I could guess that it's 'gcc' and 'the
defaults'; but the point of rep clauses is to not guess.
But if I'm compiling with GNAT and trying to interface to Borland C
with the equivalent of 'pack structs', it's just plain wrong.
On VAX and Alpha, this might have some meaning, because DEC defined a
binary API. But on x86, it's just a guess.
--
-- Stephe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-05 10:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-04 2:21 Default rep specs for record types - documented?? Anonymous Coward
2005-11-04 2:36 ` Steve
2005-11-04 4:11 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-04 5:30 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-11-05 3:13 ` Steve
2005-11-05 4:45 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-11-06 14:05 ` Steve
2005-11-06 16:08 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-07 7:25 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-11-08 13:36 ` Steve
2005-11-14 1:12 ` Robert A Duff
2005-11-14 3:03 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-14 18:08 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-11-14 18:49 ` Robert A Duff
2005-11-15 1:16 ` ADA compilers can reject types arbitrarily? Anonymous Coward
2005-11-15 2:10 ` tmoran
2005-11-15 3:12 ` Robert A Duff
2005-11-15 6:44 ` Simon Wright
2005-11-16 0:16 ` Adaists Deny Acronym. (was: ADA compilers can reject types arbitrarily?) Björn Persson
2005-11-16 5:38 ` Adaists Deny Acronym Simon Wright
2005-11-16 6:16 ` Adaists Deny Acronym. (was: ADA compilers can reject types arbitrarily?) Samuel Tardieu
2005-11-15 12:43 ` ADA compilers can reject types arbitrarily? Jeff Creem
2005-11-14 21:14 ` Default rep specs for record types - documented?? Simon Wright
2005-11-04 13:26 ` Stephen Leake
2005-11-04 14:33 ` Marc A. Criley
2005-11-04 18:35 ` Georg Bauhaus
2005-11-04 20:07 ` Britt Snodgrass
2005-11-04 14:39 ` Stephen Leake
2005-11-04 15:27 ` Britt Snodgrass
2005-11-04 15:55 ` Lauri Ora
2005-11-04 21:42 ` Larry Kilgallen
2005-11-05 2:26 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-05 2:42 ` Frank J. Lhota
2005-11-05 3:27 ` Ed Falis
2005-11-05 3:55 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-05 4:07 ` Lauri Ora
2005-11-05 13:46 ` Ed Falis
2005-11-05 10:14 ` Stephen Leake [this message]
2005-11-04 16:52 ` Frank J. Lhota
2005-11-04 16:57 ` Frank J. Lhota
2005-11-04 23:27 ` tmoran
2005-11-05 10:25 ` Stephen Leake
2005-11-14 1:09 ` Robert A Duff
2005-11-05 3:33 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-05 10:34 ` Stephen Leake
2005-11-05 16:35 ` ADA/C interfaces: type representations uncontrollable in C Anonymous Coward
2005-11-05 16:49 ` Ed Falis
2005-11-05 18:24 ` tmoran
2005-11-09 2:12 ` 'Size can mean value size OR object size, depending Anonymous Coward
2005-11-09 3:27 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-11-09 4:04 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-05 14:27 ` Default rep specs for record types - documented?? Michael Bode
2005-11-05 16:17 ` pragma convention Anonymous Coward
2005-11-06 1:07 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-11-06 22:22 ` Anonymous Coward
2005-11-07 7:34 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-11-05 14:39 ` Default rep specs for record types - documented?? Martin Krischik
2005-11-04 9:40 ` Martin Dowie
2005-11-04 14:36 ` Marc A. Criley
2005-11-04 17:45 ` Martin Krischik
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox