Re: ObjectAda - no clock drift!

[tedennison@my-dejanews.com]

In article <1998Jun17.221533.1@eisner>,
  Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote:
>
> In article <6m904m$vv0$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dennison@telepath.com writes:
>
> > In all fairness to Aonix, there's no way they could know what the clock
drift
> > rate for the hardware in any particular PC is. But they should have said
that,
> > rather than answering half the question in an incredibly terse manner.
>
> Well, Aonix was describing a compiler, not a computing system.
>
> If the RM applies to compilers rather than computing systems,
> _it_ should provide the wording that excludes drift beyond the
> control of compilers.

Perhaps, but compilers for many single-vendor non-PC platforms certianly
could supply this information. It looks like the RM had just this in mind,
with compilers for PC's and some platform "families" being forced to use the
weasel words. Additionally, I could see where the the disctinction between
the two kinds of drift could get really blurry on platforms where Calendar
doesn't have OS support.

Even when the platform's drift isn't known, I could still get an answer like
"0 + F, where F is the clock drift of the hardware", or "10 + F + G where F
is the clock drift of the hardware in seconds per month and G is the clock
drift of the underlying operating system in seconds per month".

T.E.D.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading