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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,62f1e030ed61b97b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-12 14:22:34 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3D07BB87.B3BCF8EF@raytheon.com> From: Mark Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: newbie inquiry References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:22:15 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.27.48.39 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1023916953 192.27.48.39 (Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:22:33 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:22:33 CDT Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:25831 Date: 2002-06-12T16:22:15-05:00 List-Id: Stephen Leake wrote: > > "Steven Shaw" writes: > [snip] > > * ability to put data/objects into shared-memory for sharing between > > processes > > This is not in the Ada standard, nor in any other language standard, > that I know of. I don't know of any language that has the notion of > "process"; many have "task" or "thread", but they share an single > address space. > I am not sure if the OP meant "process" when he could have meant "Ada task". If you replace process with Ada task, the answer becomes - yes, Ada does support access to data and objects in shared memory (ARM chapter 9). If they do mean process - then I agree with you. >[snip] > > Are there features in the spec that could/should be avoided? > > No. Unless you are doing hard real-time, but that's not a language > implementation issue. > For the most part I agree as well. However, if you really care about performance - you should probably measure it to determine what you should or should not avoid. Each Ada compiler is a little different. One may do exception processing well, another may do better task switching and protected objects. --Mark