From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: No_Abort_Statements
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 15:55:17 -0500
Date: 2003-07-31T15:55:17-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <vij0eehf4ogs50@corp.supernews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: bgbrbg$3ds$1@news.cs.tu-berlin.de
"Stephan Heinemann" <zombie@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote in message
news:bgbrbg$3ds$1@news.cs.tu-berlin.de...
> D.7.5 says
>
> No_Abort_Statements
> There are no abort_statements, and there are no calls on
> Task_Identification.Abort_Task.
>
> My compiler (gnat) detects only the violation caused by "abort T;". But I
get
> away with "Abort_Task(T'Identity);" or using ATC via select (see below).
> Now, I am not quite sure what this restriction really covers... Abort_Task
> should obviously be detected but what about ATC?
The restriction covers what it says; there isn't anything implied. An ATC
contains neither an abort_statement (check the grammar) nor a call to
Abort_Task.
It seems like there should be a way to eliminate ATC as well. Ravenscar uses
No_Select_Statements (which will be in Ada 0Y), but that is too broad a
brush if you just want to get rid of aborts.
You probably should send a bug report to ACT (about the missing Abort_Task)
and a comment to Ada-Comment (about ATC).
Randy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-31 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-31 19:40 No_Abort_Statements Stephan Heinemann
2003-07-31 20:55 ` Randy Brukardt [this message]
2003-07-31 22:05 ` No_Abort_Statements Samuel Tardieu
2003-08-01 20:07 ` No_Abort_Statements Randy Brukardt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox