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,fcc2d88d867060e8 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-23 09:59:39 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!4.24.21.153!chcgil2-snh1.gtei.net!news.bbnplanet.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mark H Johnson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: load and use a ".o" file? References: <132Fb.3462$I02.2996@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com> <6pEFb.418$b77.552@dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 11:59:19 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.27.48.39 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1072202378 192.27.48.39 (Tue, 23 Dec 2003 11:59:38 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 11:59:38 CST Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3764 Date: 2003-12-23T11:59:19-06:00 List-Id: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > Mark H Johnson wrote: > >> No, they were actually subroutine calls. The compiler generated >> slightly different code for an "in segment" call and a "cross segment" >> call due to the indirection. The glue code (to do the lookup) was >> basically a system service done by the OS to facilitate activation of >> new segments. > > > Technically not correct. The compiler could "in line" some local calls, > but the binder couldn't. I did not mention the binder (which in many ways I equate to having a linker on Unix), just the compiler. > What happened was that when a segment called > an entry point for which the local link was null, it trapped. The trap > routine tried to snap the link using the current environment, and if it > failed, bounced out to the user. You literally could, when an error of > this type occurred, change the search paths, or write the missing > routine, compile it, then continue from the condition. Done it myself.... > Me to. That is why I described that mechanism in terms the OP would likely understand in a previous message. --Mark