comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: Should representation clauses be complete for each bit?
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:51:37 -0400
Date: 2011-07-20T10:51:37-04:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <wcczkk9ngxy.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 73c10395-ec4f-4a02-b0fc-e35bc14424fa@e18g2000vbx.googlegroups.com

okellogg <okellogg@users.sourceforge.net> writes:

> Picking up an age old thread,
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ada/browse_thread/thread/9ab165cd2cc73cb

Wow.   1998.

> IMHO it would be a real gain if we could explicitly mention the unused
> bits in the rep spec.

I think the unused bits should be explicitly declared.

> Reusing the example from the OP,
>
>>    type x is record
>>      one : boolean;
>>      two : boolean;
>>      three : boolean;
>>    end record;
>>    for x use record
>>      one   at 0 range 0..0;
>>      two   at 0 range 3..3;
>>      three at 0 range 15..15;
>>    end record;
>
> What I imagine is something like,
>
> for x use record
>    one   at 0 range 0 .. 0;
>    null   at 0 range 1 .. 2;    // note reserved word "null"
>    two   at 0 range 3 .. 3;
>    null   at 0 range 4 .. 14;
>    three at 0 range 15 .. 15;
> end record;
> for x'Size use 16;
>
> The components with "null" would instruct the compiler to fill the
> bits with 0.

How about the following?

package P is
   type Bits2 is mod 2**2;
   pragma Assert (Bits2'Size = 2);
   type Bits11 is mod 2**11;
   pragma Assert (Bits11'Size = 11);

   type T is
      record
         One : Boolean;
         Gap1 : Bits2; -- must be zero
         Tooth : Boolean;
         Gap2 : Bits11; -- must be zero
         Ree : Boolean;
      end record
        with Predicate => T.Gap1 = 0 and T.Gap2 = 0;

   for T use
      record
         pragma Complete_Representation;
         One at 0 range 0..0;
         Gap1 at 0 range 1..2;
         Tooth at 0 range 3..3;
         Gap2 at 0 range 4..14;
         Ree at 0 range 15..15;
      end record;
end P;

with Ada.Assertions; use Ada.Assertions;
procedure P.Main is
   X : T := (One | Tooth | Ree => True, Gap1 => 0, Gap2 => 0); -- OK
begin
   begin
      X := T'(One | Tooth | Ree => True, Gap1 => 1, Gap2 => 2); -- Wrong.
   exception
      when Assertion_Error => null; -- OK
   end;
   pragma Assert (X = (One | Tooth | Ree => True, Gap1 => 0, Gap2 => 0));
end P.Main;

By the way, I find Ada's representation clauses to be at the wrong
level of abstraction.  Why can't I just write a single line of code
that means "put all the components in declaration order with no gaps
in between"?

- Bob



  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-20 14:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-20 10:34 Should representation clauses be complete for each bit? okellogg
2011-07-20 14:51 ` Robert A Duff [this message]
2011-07-20 15:24   ` Georg Bauhaus
2011-07-20 17:28     ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-21  7:37       ` Martin
2011-07-21  8:22         ` Simon Wright
2011-07-21 14:58           ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-23  0:13             ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-27 14:12               ` okellogg
2011-07-28  0:03                 ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-21  9:43         ` Georg Bauhaus
2011-07-21 15:06           ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-31 15:02             ` BrianG
2011-07-21 21:11           ` Brian Drummond
2011-07-21  7:59     ` Stephen Leake
2011-07-20 15:29   ` okellogg
2011-07-20 16:24     ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2011-07-20 16:58       ` okellogg
2011-07-20 19:38         ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2011-07-20 17:27     ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-20 19:14       ` okellogg
2011-07-20 20:13         ` J-P. Rosen
2011-07-20 21:23           ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-20 21:21         ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-21  8:02         ` Stephen Leake
2011-07-21  8:00     ` Stephen Leake
2011-07-21  7:36   ` Martin
2011-07-22 23:50   ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-23  2:16     ` tmoran
2011-07-23 15:12     ` Robert A Duff
2011-07-26 21:10       ` Randy Brukardt
2011-07-23  0:01   ` Randy Brukardt
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1998-04-17  0:00 Should Representation Clauses " Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96
     [not found] <3533C3C5.3F25CB91@cacd.rockwell.com>
1998-04-16  0:00 ` Stephen Leake
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox