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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,4e5770c49b971630 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!26g2000yqa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: High-Integrity OO and controlled types Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 12:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <679e3217-98dd-43c1-86f6-2038a029c3ea@b19g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> <94f3a272-d071-4a74-bfbd-8f2b4c2347cf@m10g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 77.255.228.6 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1304364308 14222 127.0.0.1 (2 May 2011 19:25:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 19:25:08 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 26g2000yqa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=77.255.228.6; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19125 Date: 2011-05-02T12:25:08-07:00 List-Id: On May 2, 12:01=A0pm, Cyrille wrote: > not that useful in very critical part of a system. The most common use > of controlled types is for dynamic memory management. [...] (this is in line with other responses) Thank you, this explains it a bit. Note, however, that controlled types can be also useful for more general resource management, including I/O resources. It is not clear to me how much of it can be expected in a typical (is there such a thing?) HI system, but controlled types can add to the overall safety by ensuring proper resource management, especially in the presence of exceptions - which are inherent part of Ada, unless SPARK is involved. Excluding controlled types altogether sounded like throwing baby out with the water, but now the motivations are a bit more clear to me. > Note that > Ravenscar is just a restriction of the tasking model. So many > different profiles can claim to be "Ravenscar" compliant. For some of > our ports we provide 2 different ones: one less restricted than the > other. Now I understand. -- Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com