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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a170b67591224b59 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: franke@minet.uni-jena.de (Frank Ecke) Subject: Re: subtype of value passed to pragma Interrupt_Priority Date: 1998/10/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 396710556 References: <6utver$30u$1@uuneo.neosoft.com> Organization: Department of Computer Science, FSU Jena, Germany Reply-To: franke@minet.uni-jena.de Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-10-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Wed, 30 Sep 1998 14:05:57 -0500, Pat Rogers wrote: > Why isn't the subtype Interrupt_Priority the target for the > conversion for pragma Interrupt_Priority, instead of subtype > Any_Priority? The Rationale says in D.1.3 ``Base Priority Specification'': ``The Interrupt_Priority pragma is also allowed to specify priorities below interrupt level, so that it is possible to write reusable code modules containing priority specifications, where the actual priority is a parameter.'' If the conversion were to Interrupt_Priority, you would not be able to specify an interrupt priority less than Priority'Last + 1. Of course, if you wanted an interrupt to block whatever task is currently running, doing so would be unwise. Hope this helps. Frank -- Frank Ecke In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?