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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada lacks lighterweight-than-task parallelism Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 18:06:57 +0200 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: <993f28de-6a64-480b-9c6e-d9714bcdef0d@googlegroups.com> <167bec10-2a52-4c79-958d-91faadad915b@googlegroups.com> <2d6a5ab7-812f-47a9-a958-44177a3cf203@googlegroups.com> <4834588f-c891-4a34-a32d-007c91f27399@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 3CrKQyqWAJZHy6zYVP/kUg.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 Content-Language: en-US X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3 X-Mozilla-News-Host: news://news.aioe.org Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53228 Date: 2018-06-21T18:06:57+02:00 List-Id: On 2018-06-21 16:42, Shark8 wrote: > On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 3:09:26 AM UTC-6, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >> On 2018-06-21 02:19, Shark8 wrote: >>> On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 7:38:11 AM UTC-6, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >>>> On 2018-06-20 15:14, Mehdi Saada wrote: >>>>> So I guess you are in favor with deeper (and de facto) integration of compilers with static analysis tools ? >>>> >>>> Absolutely. Not as tools. SPARK must become an integral part of Ada. >>>> Static analysis and defined provable semantics is major strength of Ada. >>>> >>> Agreed; this is why I'm pushing for a heavily integrated IDE with my IDE-proposal. >>> I'd be quite interested to hear your thoughts on the subject. >> >> Why do you think that an IDE is important here? (Not that I will use >> emacs, ever! (:-)) >> > Integration. > I don't mean "IDE" like the industry has come to think of it (editor + button-to-call-external-tool). / Think more like R-1000 on steroids, not GPS. > > The integration that you're proposing isn't going to be happening on this revision of the language, BUT we can integrate it as closely as possible in the form of an IDE, acting /as if/ there were a requirement for such integration. (And indeed, the Ada spec requires a degree of this WRT static analysis currently, so it certainly is possible to integrate these things.) I see what you mean. I think it would be difficult to do without proper integration. We need contracts properly inherited, e.g. in the case of exceptions, as well as all sorts of conditional contracts, this if that, I am OK if he is OK etc. Doing this outside the compiler would require lots of helper files gathering information from the parser, compiler, prover and redistributing it in all possible directions. My fear is that it will be impossible to handle. GPS, gprconfig, gprbuild already generate a dozen of such files, promptly to stumble upon. Recently I had a persistent compiler crash. Project cleanup didn't help. Only when I manually deleted all files except the sources it worked again. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de