Re: High-Integrity OO and controlled types

[Cyrille <comar@eu.adacore.com>]

On May 5, 9:13 am, Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homep...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 4, 10:16 pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Performance optimization is a different angle. There is no obvious reason
> > why following or ignoring Ravenscar's restrictions should result in either
> > faster or slower program.
>
> For one thing, with Ravenscar restrictions the compiler need not
> generate abort deferral related code, because without ATC it would be
> a dead code anyway. This might reduce the size of generated code and
> consequently make it faster.
> I have no hard data on what are the actual gains, however.

not mentioning that the ravenscar profile has been designed, among
other things, to allow ultra-efficient tasking runtimes (compared to
those having to support all of the Ada tasking model). For instance,
assuming a single core config, one can implement protect objects
without any locking mechanism... and such implementations exist in
several Ada technologies as far as I know...