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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!xlned.com!feeder3.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!news.stack.nl!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: STM32F4 Discovery, communication and libraries
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:21:04 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <1cbqqpx46gpl4$.ggt9magmgptm$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <60a42dc6-d8d0-4432-ae5a-86de18b82840@googlegroups.com>
 <5kkrv9hejn2qhdckkeo8lidkbh3bkme1gn@4ax.com>
 <5b91313c-acf9-4a6e-b157-6ba7c8021567@googlegroups.com>
 <ru1tv9p9g8gtd7aijug3j2eojdpdgvhihk@4ax.com>
 <0513ad07-6fbe-463a-be6f-097cd5113f52@googlegroups.com>
 <e8yq8rtj1pcm$.glzqqjd7ulsi.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4f1ec65a-d66a-40bf-a0d6-278fde206e70@googlegroups.com>
 <uxgn4sadwori$.7fnns7uw9q79$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <c69kifFfr6sU1@mid.individual.net>
 <1cjwzr30b24xy.11kpydntxhfo5$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <c6bo5nF23tiU1@mid.individual.net>
 <1xrcksk78afho$.xz6vgakq9o4t.dlg@40tude.net>
 <c6h8ieFfss4U1@mid.individual.net>
 <wq3x8ean0f5z$.em02okqv4iv8$.dlg@40tude.net> <lu29ve$lq5$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: yj8+JIQUMOEawvIM7K49kA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:188797
Date: 2014-09-02T10:21:04+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mon, 01 Sep 2014 19:21:49 +0200, G.B. wrote:

> Also, maybe you'd only think that this and that is implied by the
> language: now what about bugs in programs using full Ada tasking?
> Are they easier or more difficult to find when much more features
> of concurrency are stated explicitly in Ravenscar programs?

I don't know. The most frequent bugs with tasking I had, involved
initialization/finalization issues. The second frequent bug was live-lock.
Usually a task services two sources/queues which requires load balancing.
Typical bug is when one source is serviced and other starves.

> Will a small board made for the ubiquitous, penniless underlings
> working in cost-optimized production warrant a full Ada run-time?

Why not? Full Ada 83 ran on 2MB mini VAX, if I correctly remember.

> Why, if systems are not meant to be flexible?
> And what will be its overhead?

The overhead will be maintenance of board revisions. Software maintenance
is typically 10 times more expensive in a normal software life-cycle. In an
embedded cycle it is probably 100 times. So I'd rather risk more
unnecessary flexibility than less.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de