Re: stupid question: how can I finish a program?

["Marin D. Condic" <not.valid@acm.org>]

Oh, and how could it be defined in a portable way? C does it with a couple
of standard functions. Ada can make standard subprograms too, so why not?
Probably (since it is an OS dependent thing and might not have meaning
outside the context of an OS) there should be some sort of standard package
like "Ada.OS_Services" that contained proccedure(s) to connect to whatever
the OS provides. (I hear something like this is in the works)

There can't be *that* many different ways of killing the process that a
reasonable compromise answer couldn't be found. What more would be needed
than a "Kill_The_Process (Optional_Integer_Return_Code_For_Unix_Freaks) ;"
call? Would it need to be dramatically different between Unix/Windows/Mac?
Would anyone care if it couldn't be implemented easily on some obscure OS?
Would the formal definition need to be any more complicated than:
"Implementation Defined - but we suggest that you make it do what any sane
person using the target OS would reasonably expect..."? It doesn't seem like
Rocket Science to me - nor does it sound like a horendous burden on the
compiler writers. The only real question could be "Is it reasonably useful
to have such an operation?" and I think the answer is "Yes".

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com

Enabling Digital.
Our Vision is to be the biggest supplier worldwide of digital gateway
technology.
www.pacemicro.com

"Dmitry A.Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message
news:aki1tq$1ij38n$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de...
> could still hang up. (2) How to define it in a portable way (= in language
> terms)?
>
>