On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 18:48 -0500, Richard Kenner wrote: > It looks like this one needs overflow checking to pass (-gnato): > > ACATS should aways be run with -gnato since that's the only way to > get the behavior mandated by RM. Why are we running it without it? Is > this new? Certainly -gnato was used during validations.
On GCC we use -gnato on tests known to need it (/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/overflow.lst) since we want to test flags the typical GCC/Ada user does use and not what official validation requires (which is -gnato -gnatE IIRC). VRP might now force us to update the overflow list but I'm not sure about switching to a full -gnato everywhere. > Richard, Arnaud, could you check amongst GNAT experts if for such > types (non power of two modulus), it's not worth enabling overflow > checks by default now that we have VRP doing non trivial > optimisations? People using non power of two modulus are not caring > for performance anyway, so having a compliant implementation by > default won't harm. > > Hardly worth writing the code to bother with that given how rare > such things are ... True. Laurent
