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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!samsung!ctrsol!emory!cambridge.apple.com!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!tut!tukki!sakkinen From: sakkinen@tukki.jyu.fi (Markku Sakkinen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada vs C/UNIX / switching speeds Message-ID: <2110@tukki.jyu.fi> Date: 23 Nov 89 08:30:52 GMT References: <14042@grebyn.com> Reply-To: sakkinen@jytko.jyu.fi (Markku Sakkinen) SAKKINEN@FINJYU.bitnet (alternative) Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland List-Id: In article <14042@grebyn.com> ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden) writes: > [...] Remember, >it is Ada and not C or C++ which makes the mistake of having >tasking be part of a programming language rather than part of an >OS or a library. I don't agree it's a mistake. On the contrary, it is better to do tasking in a language that has been designed for tasking than in one that hasn't. Many people seem to believe that programming language problems go magically away if we move them from the language proper to libraries, i.e. sweep under the carpet. (Similarly, it was often supposed some years ago that many problems disappear if things are moved from the ordinary programming realm to the silicon.) > [...] >Did I ever say anything about implementing a real-time or embedded >system in vanilla UNIX? Did any of the C or UNIX gurus on the net? This rather confesses that the tasking capabilities of normal UNIX versions are no good (and I think that does not concern only true real-time or embedded systems). It is already in a little contradiction with Holden's first opinion. > [...] Markku Sakkinen Department of Computer Science University of Jyvaskyla (a's with umlauts) Seminaarinkatu 15 SF-40100 Jyvaskyla (umlauts again) Finland