Re: Ada Annex E (Just curious :-)

[Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com>]

In article <3AA43C58.105B970D@linuxchip.demon.co.uk>, Dr Adrian Wrigley says...
>
>I was thinking about the viability of using Annex E in a system with
>multiple microprocessors, sharing only part of their memory space.
>Suppose there was a coherent cache or multi-port memory, the
>Annex E implementation could work by referring to blocks of memory,
>making response times predictable, and performance high.

Admittedly, I don't know all that much about Annex E. But in this situation, why
wouldn't you prefer to have direct compiler support for putting tasks on
different processors, rather than mess with Annex E? The Harris Nighthawk
(Ada83) compiler worked that way (and was quite nice for hard-realtime). Ada
95's protected types seem tailor-made for this kind of setup. I'd think Annex E
would be more suited to a situation where you have multiple processors that
share *no* memory and must communicate through I/O. 

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com