Re: terminate applications

[Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <FTwUa.367$XK4.14917@read1.cgocable.net>, "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca> writes:
> "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message news:$TwrUBtoh25l@eisner.encompasserve.org...
>> In article <3F227982.30204@noplace.com>, Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> writes:
>> > O.K., but what is wrong with saying that most operating systems provide
>> > some means of immediate process termination in the form of a system call
>> > and that Ada ought to have a portable and common binding to that (and
>> > other) OS procedures?
>>
>> What is wrong is that not all operating systems define those facilities
>> in the same way.  Ada programmers moving such code from one platform to
>> another should be forced to read the definition for the particular OS
>> to see if it still matches the expectations of their program.
>>
>> VMS has about three such calls, with varying effects.  Which one should
>> an Ada compiler invoke ?
> 
> That is an interesting point. I don't know VMS, but I would expect
> that the one that MDC is looking for can be chosen from that set.
> 
> How do these 3 vary?  Surely, one of these must be inline with what
> other O/S's provide.

Are you claiming that all operating systems other than VMS are uniform
in what they provide ?

> The other API entries (if useful), can be provided
> by a Halt.Aux package or some other extension perhaps.

Presuming the VMS choices cover the universe of possibilities (doubtful),
what basis is there to think there is a uniform view of what is "the other"
method.