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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ravenscar References
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 10:46:17 +0200
Organization: Tidorum Ltd
Message-ID: <gaatmnFtp42U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <q1nqpc$f2k$1@gioia.aioe.org> <q1p3vl$gbn$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net TIOlP+9L0IhsBTjo3s6dFwMzygMG84uuC8VV/uN+SpV1BXl2vG
Cancel-Lock: sha1:HDOu9fzi1CEcDdlt1OJbMzYpqbo=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
In-Reply-To: <q1p3vl$gbn$1@dont-email.me>
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:55292
Date: 2019-01-17T10:46:17+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 19-01-17 07:31 , J-P. Rosen wrote:
> Le 16/01/2019 à 18:48, lyttlec a écrit :
>> Can anyone suggest a good reference on using the ravenscar profile? In
>> the Ada books I have, it only gets a one or two page mention. A
>> reference with an extended case study would be great.
>>
> Did you get the official report at
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg9/n424.pdf
> ?

Note that the discussion of pragma Atomic in that document invites risky 
programming. For example, it says "All global objects that are either of 
a protected type or an atomic type may be safely shared, and so no 
static identification [to find risky, unprotected sharing] is required 
for these."

However, as I trust most of us know, while a pragma Atomic ensures that 
any read or write of the object is itself atomic, it does not ensure 
that a read-modify-write update sequence, such as X := X + 1, is atomic 
in its entirety. IMO this means that even atomic shared objects should 
be identified and the safety of their uses checked. And that using a 
protected type, with its fully atomic operations, is preferable, when 
possible.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .