On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 09:34 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 06:25:12PM +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote: > > for I in T'First .. Dynamic_N loop > > T (I) := 0.0; -- generate check I in T'First .. T'Last > > end loop; > > > > => > > > > if Dynamic_N >= T'First and Dynamic_N > T'Last then > > Huh? I can't understand the first comparison. > > Actually Ada is not Fortran-66 and allows empty loops, no?
Ada for loop over "A .. B" will be empty if "A > B" and we obviously must not raise an exception if the loop is empty hence the first comparison is equivalent to "not (T'First > Dynamic_N)" which is true when the loop is not empty. > I don't think so. And the code quality when checking for > overflows was abysmal last time I tried. We're talking about range checking here, not arithmetic overflow checking (which is another topic where GCC infrastructure change could help Ada of course). Sincerely, Laurent
