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,d1b37af34f7d1666
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Connecting To Interrupts Using Protected Procedures
Date: 1999/02/18
Message-ID: <7ai5p9$6vc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 445844047
References: <36CB42FA.FDD195CF@pwfl.com> <7ag0p8$ae3$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <36CC3CA5.F497700A@pwfl.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x7.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 18 22:55:41 1999 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-02-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <36CC3CA5.F497700A@pwfl.com>,
  diespammer@pwfl.com wrote:
> Hair splitting. The annex says that an implementation
> *may* provide the feature, which by my understanding of
> "may" means they may equally well *not* implement it.
> Granted, we usually get from real-time compiler vendors
> mechanisms that are necessary for doing the job, but its
> nice to know what sort of things you can count on.

Generally a reasonable point of view, but not applicable
here, the set of interrupts supported by either of the
two techniques in the RM is completely implementation
dependent, so you cannot count on either being present.
A compiler that provided only the Annex J way of doing
things is odd, but not non-conformant.


> > I think the likelyhood of ANY of the annex J features
> > ever being removed fr om the language is zero. Why on
> > earth cause significant back compatibility problems for
> > no good reason?
>
> Probably a good way to bet, but again, considering that
> the mechanism is an optional item, I would imagine that
> over time, compiler writers will discontinue
> implementing/supporting it. (Unless guys like me are
> willing to shell out the big bucks to keep
> the feature in ;-)

What we implement has to do with what customers want, not
whether a feature is optional or not. After all the entire
annexes, including the entire interrupt feature is
optional!
>

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own