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: 2002-08-01 13:32:51 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!usc.edu!newspeer.cts.com!galanthis.cts.com!127.0.0.1.MISMATCH!not-for-mail
Sender: kst@king.cts.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: 64-bit integers in Ada
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>
From: Keith Thompson <kst@cts.com>
Date: 01 Aug 2002 13:32:49 -0700
Message-ID: <yec3ctyqpzi.fsf@king.cts.com>
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.68.192.180
X-Trace: 1028233969 nntp.cts.com 320 209.68.192.180
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27586
Date: 2002-08-01T13:32:49-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:
[...]
> Is there a case where, for example, it would make any sense at all for an
> implementation to *not* give the user 16 bits? Would it ever make sense for
> the type Integer to be 8 bits, for example?

3.5.4(21) requires the range of Integer to include the range -2**15+1
.. 2**15-1 (i.e., Integer has to be at least 16 bits).

Even if that requirement weren't there, Ada.Calendar declares:

    subtype Year_Number is Integer range 1901 .. 2099;

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"