Re: epoll Ada binding

[Mark Lorenzen <mark.lorenzen@ofir.dk>]

Wojtek Narczynski <wojtek@power.com.pl> writes:

> Yes, it is my plan do "stay in Ada". I don't think there is going to be a
> problem with that. FSU Threads (userspace) used to be used to pass ACATS
> tests on platforms which had problematic native threading libraries.

I think that the Native Posix Threads Library used on newer Linux
distributions is very efficient and POSIX compatible. I do not know if
gcc GNAT is up to speed with this or still needs the FSU Threads.

> I'm not really patching it. I am trying to create yet another "flavor".

Sounds like TopLayers approach:

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=3675

(the server seems to be unreachable at the moment).

> You mean this SDL http://www.sdl-forum.org? I merely know that it exists,
> would you recommend studying it to somebody intersted in building
> networking applications?

Yes - the Specification and Description Language. SDL has some
interesting concepts, but is not a wonder in engineering. It is
however (in my view) much better than the state charts in UML.

> 
> Do you think SMTP (my primary protocol of interest right now) would be
> amenable to such (formal) treatment? After all S - stands for Sloppy ;-)

Formal treatment of any protocol is valuable!

> 
> Regards,
> Wojtek

- Mark Lorenzen