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: 103376,19140af19dfa6e01 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-25 08:00:50 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: rleif@rleif.com (Robert C. Leif) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada 0Y plans for garbage collection? Date: 25 Sep 2003 08:00:47 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <657ea3e3.0309250700.3b0e5ac@posting.google.com> References: <1127954.kcBZz6amlf@linux1.krischik.com> <3F60E747.40805@attbi.com> <1557617.vUiuI5kIPQ@linux1.krischik.com> <3F6F1A93.50709@attbi.com> <2q30nv4fain641rin9dia3onjr7ut01our@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.105.82.40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1064502049 15556 127.0.0.1 (25 Sep 2003 15:00:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Sep 2003 15:00:49 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42896 Date: 2003-09-25T15:00:49+00:00 List-Id: If this could be done, it would be extremely valuable. A major problem with PCs is what was an information appliance was transformed into a computer with a full blown operating system. This is exactly what the majority of customers do NOT need. They would be much better served by a device that could be turned on and off by a simple switch. Parenthetically, Nick has one year from the date of publication to apply for a US Patent. If his technology works and is new, this patent could be very valuable. He could even license it with a clause that requires the code to be written in Ada. Bob Leif Robert C. Leif, Ph.D. Email rleif@rleif.com "Nick Roberts" wrote in message news:... > "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote in message > news:2q30nv4fain641rin9dia3onjr7ut01our@4ax.com... > > [re booting and sleeping] > > Yep. Especially interesting it becomes with plug'n'play devices. You > > have, say a USB or PCMCIA device attached, before your Windoze > > hibernates. While it peacefully sleeps, you archly eject the hardware > > and then wake it up! The effect might be amazing, though predictable > > ... > > Of course in a truly memory-mapped OS, the present concept of > > hardware drives is out of place. One more reason for Ada OS? > > I think the broad scheme I would like to adopt for AdaOS would be as > follows. > > Each device driver, having at least once gone through a complete hardware > configuration procedure, would record the hardware configuration upon > shutdown. Upon the next reboot, the device driver would reinstate this > configuration, and would perform a quick check that the configuration still > accords with the detectable hardware (if this check failed, the full > configuration procedure would be activated). > > With a bit of care, this technique should make it possible to fully shutdown > and then reboot very rapidly, but it would still be safe in the case of > intervening hardware changes (which would automatically cause > reconfiguration). > > I intend to design the user application software for AdaOS so that it > (normally) remembers its important state in between the user logging off and > back on again. This is primarily to encourage users to log off whenever they > leave the workstation, but it also means that a user can log off, shutdown, > reboot, and log on, and all (or most) of their work (open windows) will be > reinstated as it was when the user logged off. > > I don't know why operating systems (Windows, SunOS, and Linux in my direct > experience) are so slow at booting up, but I suspect it has a lot to do with > device drivers intialising themselves and their hardware. If this > initialisation can be either avoided (by the above tactics) or deferred (to > be done in the background after the boot procedure has got the system to a > usable stage), the user will perceive a fast boot process. > > If the user can shutdown and reboot quickly (within a few seconds, I > suppose), and does not have to go through the rigmarole of closing a lot of > programs (windows) and then restarting them, I suspect the demand for a > 'sleep mode' would be largely obviated. > > If any OS is to be really secure, it must be basically reliable. I think > Dmitry has neatly illustrated the dangers of such fundamental complications > as sleep modes and other forms of partial shutdown. If a machine supports a > sleep mode, I think that's okay (especially as part of an overall power > management regime), but a full shutdown is better. > > However, I'm open to debate!