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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 115aec,f41f1f25333fa601
X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a3ca574fc2007430
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: james@cdac.com (James Thiele)
Subject: Re: Ada and Automotive Industry
Date: 1996/11/11
Message-ID: <1996Nov11.215227.599@ole.cdac.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 195850051
sender: news@ole.cdac.com (Usenet News)
references: <1996Nov8.183051.21638@ole.cdac.com>
 <mheaney-ya023280001011961933060001@news.ni.net> <dewar.847730824@merv>
organization: Cascade Design Automation, Bellevue, WA
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.realtime
Date: 1996-11-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.847730824@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
>James said
>
>">We didn't find any Ada compiler vendors in the 1986-88 era who
>>supported preemptive scheduling.  And they all talked to us,
>>because we were potentially a huge customer.  Do you know any?"
>
>
>I guess he did not look very hard, many Ada compilers supported preemptive
>scheduling in this time period. I do know of one or two exceptions, but
>they were definitely expceptions. Perhaps it is just rusty memory :-)
>

We talked to *all* major Ada compiler vendors.  Their implementation
of tasking was *always* insufficient.  We looked *very* hard.

You are the one with rusty memory.

--
James
--
James Thiele
james@cdac.com (work) or jet@eskimo.com (home)
http://www.eskimo.com/~jet