From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Niklas Holsti Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ichbiah 2022 compiler mode Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2024 20:13:03 +0300 Organization: Tidorum Ltd Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net HbsGADbK1BTnMKELoYo/sQ4FfWozRxp84qyaOsQ2kwZqSaiMEm Cancel-Lock: sha1:r4TwPIajbm93l9D4cFqktc11LA8= sha256:0D0/cLFnWOqwDfnQ57N6aS7508UVoaQ7+KWRnNdnGgY= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:66328 List-Id: On 2024-09-07 0:22, Simon Wright wrote: > "Randy Brukardt" writes: > >> (A) Do we need tasks at all? Parallel and task are very much >> overlapping capabilities. > > I don't think I've ever wanted parallel. Most embedded system tasks are > one-off, aren't they? More and more mebedded systems use multi-core processors and do heavy, parallelizable computations. "Parallel" is intended to support that in a light-weight way. In a recent discussion with the European Space Agency, they expressed interest in using OpenMP for such computations on-board spacecraft with multi-core processors, which is an "embedded" context. Regarding tasks in embedded systems, I agree that most are one-off, but I have occasionally also used tens of tasks of the same task type. I disagree with Randy's view that tasks and "parallel" are much overlapping. Tasks are able to communicate with each other, but AIUI parallel tasklets are not meant to do that, and may not be able to do that. Tasks can have different priorities; tasklets cannot.