Re: Learning Ada (Was: unsigned type)

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Adam Beneschan" <adam@irvine.com> wrote in message 
news:c5a3eb71-0395-4727-b4dd-826b1196d262@m3g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>On Jul 6, 4:15 pm, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:
>
>> All the standard requires is that Integer is 16-bits
>
>You mean "at least 16 bits", right?

Yes, of course.

>>, and that Long_Integer
>> (if it exists) is longer than Integer.
>
>I think that should be "at least as long"... (3.5.4(25): "the range of
>Integer should be no wider than that of Long_Integer").  Of course, if
>Integer is only 16 bits then Long_Integer must be longer (since
>Long_Integer must be at least 32 bits), but if Integer is 32 bits then
>it appears OK if Long_Integer is the same size as Integer.

You're correct of course, although I think it is pretty dubious to have a 
Long_Integer type with the same range as Integer. Probably it is allowed to 
support another form of compatibility (so that the name exists), but it is 
always better to not use the type in the first place (unlike Integer, you're 
never required to use Long_Integer).

                           Randy.


                                  -- Adam