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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e9498cf5655316a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Matthew Heaney <matthew_heaney@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Ada83 and Ada95 interrupt handling
Date: 1999/02/24
Message-ID: <m3n224fpx4.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 447740689
Sender: matt@mheaney.ni.net
References: <36D303B8.B1AB9A49@swol.de>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 19:17:37 PDT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-02-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Armin <ArminSchmidle@swol.de> writes:

> I am porting an Ada83 application to Ada95. In Ada83 there was a
> construction
> known as interrupt entry. Assume we have the following task (with two
> interrupt
> entrys from a DSP and a timer source)
 
...
 
> How can I do the same thing in Ada95 ?

You're code should continue to work in Ada95.  Interrupt entries of a
task are obsolescent, but not entirely gone.

The "preferred" method now is to use an interrupt handler associated with
a protected object.  I haven't done this yet, so I cannot give you more
advice than to say, read the interrupt handler stuff in the RM.