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,a170b67591224b59
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: subtype of value passed to pragma Interrupt_Priority
Date: 1998/10/02
Message-ID: <EACHUS.98Oct2172409@spectre.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 397169583
References: <6utver$30u$1@uuneo.neosoft.com>
 <slrn7175sn.78e.franke@pax01f.mipool.uni-jena.de>
 <6v08fv$l5o$1@uuneo.neosoft.com> <6v0903$9qp$1@platane.wanadoo.fr>
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-10-02T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <6v0903$9qp$1@platane.wanadoo.fr> "Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen.adalog@wanadoo.fr> writes:

  > The idea is that pragma priority should be restricted to "safe" priorities,
  > but then you need another pragma to access the full range. It was named
  > "Interrupt_Priority" to remind people that it gave access to interrupt
  > priorities, but it could have been named
  > "All_Priorities_Including_Interrupt_Priorities" ... Oh well....

  Or Unchecked_Priorities... ;-)
--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...