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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,a9bbfb8cd49f1a51 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!trndny03.POSTED!c2bfcbcf!not-for-mail Subject: Re: Isn't this in favour of Ada?? Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <42d64dde$0$64794$edfadb0f@dread12.news.tele.dk> <8764vcdv2f.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> From: "Ed Falis" Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: User-Agent: Opera M2/8.01 (Linux, build 1204) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:57:03 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.22.145.74 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: trndny03 1121691423 70.22.145.74 (Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:57:03 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:57:03 EDT Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3657 Date: 2005-07-18T12:57:03+00:00 List-Id: On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:37:56 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote: > I think it would be an improvement for Ada if it had a mechanism for > defining its own interrupts and/or attaching them to various system > signals. (Something like an exception, but where the handler ends up > being a task entry or protected type procedure call) The mechanisms > currently in place are typically pretty good for bare-board programming > & connecting to some hardware interrupt, but I'd like a mechanism for > defining my own. > With GNAT, the RM mechanisms for handling interrupts are used for signals on "native" platforms, so you should be able to do something like what you want now. - Ed