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-Thread: 103376,3025dd6d917b499c
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.180.99.163 with SMTP id er3mr5381369wib.2.1352362057717;
        Thu, 08 Nov 2012 00:07:37 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 q13ni188071wii.0!nntp.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.x-privat.org!news.jacob-sparre.dk!munin.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@nbi.dk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada, the best language with the not-so-best tool chain
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:07:34 +0400
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <87wqxwzfeh.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk>
References: <38af7fb8-b0a4-4a31-87aa-b7b698cc89c3@googlegroups.com>
	<85k3v0jqj0.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
	<5df9e216-b808-419e-91ac-19b7fe7dc153@googlegroups.com>
	<857gqyg9gq.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 41.136.233.171
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1352362056 2677 41.136.233.171 (8 Nov 2012 08:07:36 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 08:07:36 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:a+NVU81bZTGmdUE0G5CHex+k95Q=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: 2012-11-08T12:07:34+04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Stephen Leake wrote:

> Which raises the question; why insist on "bareboard", instead of a
> well supported OS that does what you need?

Because it is hard to find a well supported OS that does what you need?
We are using Linux on ARM underneath an application we are developing at
the moment, but I'm a bit worried about the timing properties of having
a full OS running.  We may end up solving the problem by having a
hardware or a kernel-space clock triggering the microcontrollers running
the jitter-sensitive parts of the application.  This way we may miss
some measurements, but those we get will be from well-defined times.

In many cases this kind of work-around can be an easier solution than
attempting to create a full/Ravenscar run-time and the drivers required
for an application.

Greetings,

Jacob
-- 
No trees were killed in the sending of this message.
However a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.