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: 103376,15e9725ee4ac8322 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: do_while@ridgecrest.ca.us (Do-While Jones) Subject: Re: [Q] Operating System Command Interface Date: 1998/05/05 Message-ID: <6in63v$rd2$1@owens.ridgecrest.ca.us>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 350439682 References: <6ims5j$1vo@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com> Organization: RidgeNet - SLIP/PPP Internet, Ridgecrest, CA. (760) 371-3501 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-05-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <6ims5j$1vo@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>, John McCabe wrote: >Am I right in thinking that, as standard, Ada has no direct perating >system command interface akin to the C "System" call? Yes, because there is no standard operating system interface. Of course you can always call the C "system" call from Ada, but it is just as unpredictable in Ada as it is in C. The Ada code to call "system" is in the recent thread called "Program (not task) Activation". I took the discussion about the inconsistent behavior of C's "system" call to comp.lang.c, and several Windows 95-related discussion groups a couple weeks ago. I got only one response. That person quoted chapter and verse explaining why Windows 95 does not have to return an error code if the "system" call fails. He suggested I take the matter up with Bill myself. It didn't seem to bother any of the C programmers that "system" on Windows NT works like "system" on UNIX, but "system" on Windows 95 doesn't. I wonder what "system" will do on Windows 98. Do-While Jones +--------------------------------+ | Know Ada | | [Ada's Portrait] | | Will Travel | | wire do_while@ridgecrest.ca.us | +--------------------------------+