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: 103376,61006929d3e14455
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews2.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: aschwarz@acm.org (skidmarks)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada Pointer Size Problem
Date: 12 Oct 2004 11:44:10 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <35f054ea.0410121044.bf19fea@posting.google.com>
References: <35f054ea.0410101150.25bec2f5@posting.google.com>
 <mailman.269.1097458704.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.46.200.230
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1097606652 10527 127.0.0.1 (12 Oct 2004 18:44:12
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:44:12 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5102
Date: 2004-10-12T11:44:10-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org> wrote in message news:<mailman.269.1097458704.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>...
> aschwarz@acm.org (skidmarks) writes:

> > I've looked at the 'info' tex file included with the 
> > gcc distribution and so far have not found how to 
> > change a 64-bit pointer to a 32-bit pointer. 
> 
> Why do you want to do that? A pointer to an integer is not a pointer
> to a string.

  I misspoke, perhaps sarcastically. I don't want to change pointer sizes
  and you have gone far to explain what I'm seeing. Although the reason
  for including the dope vector as part of an Access Type eludes me, the
  explanation I understand. (The elusion is because it seems just as
  reasonable to 'point' to a dope vector when specifying an access type
  rather than including the dope vector as the Access Type.) Albeit, 
  thanks to all for the clarification between System.Address and Access
  Type.

> 
> > I've thought that maybe I am getting the dope vector size associated
> > with the String_Ptr but this really doesn't make sense. 
> 

  See above. To resolve this (type of) difficulty locally - for Ada83
  interfaces to C primarily, we do the following:

   A_Access   := array'Access
   B_Pointer  := array(array'First)'Address

  and for the purists, THIS IS NOT TRUE ADA, so don't flame me because
  it's not true Ada.

> Why doesn't that make sense?
> 
> > The Integer_Ptr is only 32-bits which seems to be correct but both
> > pointers should be the same.
> 
> Why?

  See above.

And to all, thanks. You have clarified the issues.

art