From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 12 Aug 93 22:43:46 GMT
From: scf16!bashford@ford-wdl1.arpa  (Dave Bashford)
Subject: Re: Language runtime requirements (was Re: DoD
Message-ID: <1993Aug12.224346.20541@scf.loral.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article ... falis@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (Edward Falis) writes:
>
>As for our LynxOS, MVS, Solaris, HP-RT and OS/2 products, the Windows-NT
>Ada compiler will map Ada tasks onto OS threads.  For OS' that don't
>provide lightweight processes, we generally map all tasks into a single
>process.  For embedded-oriented products, tasks are basically a register
>set, control block and some workspace.
>
>So, while I agree with the comment that the Alsys runtime does assume it's
>the "main", I can't agree with the conclusion that we ignore the OS under-
>lying capabilities.  The runtime comprises multiple virtual machine layers
>that are mapped onto a bottom layer of services that we judge to be
>most effective for a given operating environment.
>
...
>- Ed Falis, Alsys

So, why the problem with Unix ?  I've heard excuses like "it would be too
inefficient."  But Unix/C has been using multi-tasking well for years.
Besides, I'd take inefficient over useless any day.
-- 

db
bashford@srs.loral.com (Dave Bashford, Sunnyvale, CA)