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=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY, INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,66752102482bbdca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Ken Garlington" Subject: Re: Required Metrics Date: 2000/05/02 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 618228690 References: <5DDO4.2237$wb7.194854@news.flash.net> <8ek4ea$5ta$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <390DC8AD.59B5EBEE@averstar.com> X-Priority: 3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 X-Complaints-To: abuse@flash.net X-Trace: news.flash.net 957269158 216.215.65.103 (Tue, 02 May 2000 07:05:58 CDT) Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 07:05:58 CDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-05-02T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Having gone back and read the thread on this subject from May 1999, the closest thing I found to an answer to my question was, essentially, "It's not practical for a vendor to document the required metrics if it relies on an underlying operating system." I'm not sure I buy this in all cases -- what if the OS vendor provides sufficient information on their thread support, for example? -- but let's assume it's a reasonable caveat. Given this, then: 1. Why wouldn't this be the response given in the documentation; i.e. "This implementation conforms to the Real-Time Annex, except for the documentation of metrics, which is not practical"? (Better yet, why didn't anyone put this in the ARM to begin with, or write an interpretation after the fact?) 2. What would this mean for an implementation that didn't use an operating system; e.g. GNORT? (By the way, if it wasn't obvious, this isn't a rant about GNAT. It's a question about the meaning -- or maybe, lack of meaning -- of the standard...) I'm starting to wonder about the responses to this question (and the lack thereof). Are there other requirements in the ARM that are optional in practice? Is it a general rule that if it's not tested in the validation suite, a vendor can decline to implement the requirement but still be considered conforming? If so, what does this mean with respect to the assumed benefits of standardization? "Hey, this compiler doesn't implement tasking, but it says it conforms to the ARM!" "Well, you can always call the pthreads package and implement it yourself. Call the vendor, they'll provide assistance. Alternately, you can ask for tasking support in a later release."