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=2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,GAPPY_SUBJECT, INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!mel.dit.csiro.au!yarra!bohra.cpg.oz.au!als From: als@bohra.cpg.oz.au (Anthony Shipman) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Types defining h/w r/o or w/o registers Message-ID: <1991Jun4.144821.14504@bohra.cpg.oz.au> Date: 4 Jun 91 14:48:21 GMT Article-I.D.: bohra.1991Jun4.144821.14504 References: <3949@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu> <1991Jun2.095459.1@east.pima.edu> <1991Jun3.075741.1945@weyrich.UUCP> Organization: Software Division, Computer Power Group List-Id: In article <1991Jun3.075741.1945@weyrich.UUCP>, orville@weyrich.UUCP (Orville R. Weyrich) writes: ................ > > Is there any issue pending before the 9x committee to address the issue of > declaring certain memory locations as VOLATILE? Wasn't there something in the tasking part of the language for this? Ada's multi-tasking model is shared memory between tasks. I vaguely recall there was a pragma, or something in the machine-dependant chapter, to declare certain memory locations as volatile. Certainly what you have is logically equivalent to multi-tasking except that one of the tasks is implemented in hardware. -- Anthony Shipman "You've got to be taught before it's too late, Computer Power Group Before you are six or seven or eight, 19 Cato St., East Hawthorn, To hate all the people your relatives hate, Melbourne, Australia You've got to be carefully taught." R&H