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: a07f3367d7,6a8952cbe009f3ed
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.180.98.103 with SMTP id eh7mr1758444wib.3.1360469028112;
        Sat, 09 Feb 2013 20:03:48 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 g1ni1983wig.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.141.40.65.MISMATCH!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newspeer1.nac.net!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nrc-news.nrc.ca!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!news.snarked.org!feeder.erje.net!us.feeder.erje.net!xmission!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Numerical calculations: Why not use fixed point types for
 everything?
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 12:31:44 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcck3qovvcv.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <db7b4d36-6c49-4501-954e-68ecc55c3d32@googlegroups.com>
 <4905b963-0036-4129-8050-fb26ef0154d6@googlegroups.com>
 <32314026-23ae-45b8-a4c5-e589e7d79de2@googlegroups.com>
 <kdttga$83d$3@dont-email.me>
 <64e3c342-d042-40a2-8a16-b1f0cdff9f16@googlegroups.com>
 <91527f7c-0679-4c21-95c7-a07f3fff265d@googlegroups.com>
 <8cc51443-23f6-4736-a862-d0223998fc2e@googlegroups.com>
 <b9aea316-4b79-41ce-987e-746432945e22@googlegroups.com>
 <753a3719-e15f-4626-b3cc-ac76f7ef7499@googlegroups.com>
 <8ee504a6-b371-42ef-a91e-bbb70e3b81d8@googlegroups.com>
 <an93k2Fbg9jU1@mid.individual.net>
 <2665b0e1-0558-45ac-9a26-7eb7a1ecd689@googlegroups.com>
 <an9drdFdmgeU1@mid.individual.net>
 <ee696908-df30-4e46-a9f4-645749d3a388@googlegroups.com>
 <an9uksFhgjpU1@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: pcls6.std.com 1359999104 9632 192.74.137.71 (4 Feb 2013 17:31:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 17:31:44 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6W+qLoUnnRi8cCKtLNs6wGRcamI=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: 2013-02-04T12:31:44-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> writes:

> Depends. Such type-less "named numbers" (in Ada-speak) have different
> properties than typed constant objects: if you combine them in an
> expression, the compiler uses unbounded-precision and unbounded-range
> arithmetic, ...

That's true for all static expressions, not just ones involving
named numbers.

>... which may or may not be what you want; and they match any
> integer or floating-point type, respectively, which again may or may not
> be what you want.

Right.

- Bob