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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,15410c804d3d9da2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-03 10:06:54 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!212.74.64.35!colt.net!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!btnet-peer!btnet-peer0!btnet!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news2-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "chris.danx" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: Can any one shed some light on this problem. X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: <_NAa7.3833$tQ5.1459602@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com> Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:01:46 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.253.12.200 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news2-win.server.ntlworld.com 996858106 62.253.12.200 (Fri, 03 Aug 2001 18:01:46 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 18:01:46 BST Organization: ntlworld News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11235 Date: 2001-08-03T18:01:46+01:00 List-Id: "simon broadhead" wrote in message news:f076c667.0108030252.591a1812@posting.google.com... > I am doing a research assessment at the university of Glamorgan on > Ada. I have been asked to re-examine the language and look at how > effective ADA would be in creating a microkernel, and to outline the ^ this is the American Disabilities Association not Ada, I know it's being pernickity but ppl round here do tend to get annoyed about this. > features which are lacking in Ada for such a project and also those > features which neatly map a microkernel. > I do not have much prograing skills so I am a bit lost on this. > Well I've not considered the method by which I'll be structuring my micro-kernel in Ada, and it depends on the nature of scheduling; preemptive, cooperative or fully preemptive. An idea may be the use of protected objects for kernel modules but this may only be appropriate for cooperative/preemptive but not fully preemptive (a kernel mode operation would complete with the use of protected objects and not be halted, upon a given condition so kernel operations would not be fully preemtive. I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of full preemption so maybe I'm wrong about this). I know that for interrupts (they might not be in the kernel proper but they are part of the OS), the likely choice is a protected object. > I have bean asked to examine the synchronization mechanism > (rendez-vous) which is promoted by ADA and contrast this to the > Dijkstra's (p/v) wait and signal mechanism. I'm afraid I can't say much on this, someone else might be able to help.