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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,71171f53c22d92b5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-11-14 06:57:49 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!adsl-213-200-246-247.cybernet.CH!not-for-mail
From: Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: C's trikery semantic opens up backdoor in new Linux kernel
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:56:14 +0100
Organization: JeLlyFish software
Message-ID: <bp2qhc$1k9av9$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
References: <3FB1A63C.9080200@nowhere.com>
 <mailman.328.1068623355.25614.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <bot7vd$1gtgp4$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <mailman.332.1068645284.25614.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <botf2c$1i2eq5$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <bp2kc1$k0u$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Reply-To: v.hoefler@acm.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-213-200-246-247.cybernet.ch (213.200.246.247)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1068821868 54832105 213.200.246.247 (16 [175126])
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2491
Date: 2003-11-14T15:56:14+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus wrote:

>Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com> wrote:
>: No. And you? Do you really think that the linux kernel community would
>: like the idea of using a *function* to get/set a plain simple integer
>: variable? I already hear them scream: "It would be too inefficient.
>: Especially in a *kernel*!" ;-)
>
>Though all you have to explain is pragma Inline and -gnatn or
>-gnatN and show them the disassembly...

Yes.

>If you tell them that pragma Inline is standard and supported
>in GCC, that should be impressive?

Of course. But think about it: Isn't it a funny thing that you can do
a thing efficient enough in Ada just to prevent a problem in C, which
OTOH you even wouldn't have at all if you'd use Ada in the first
place?

What's the definition for this sort of stuff called?


Vinzent.