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!nntp.giganews.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!d9c68f36!not-for-mail From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Isn't this in favour of Ada?? References: <42d64dde$0$64794$edfadb0f@dread12.news.tele.dk> <8764vcdv2f.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <__NCe.5411$oZ.1564@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:51:41 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.14.178 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net 1121777501 209.165.14.178 (Tue, 19 Jul 2005 05:51:41 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 05:51:41 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3674 Date: 2005-07-19T12:51:41+00:00 List-Id: Well, if I thought about it long enough, I could probably figure out some way of disconnecting the interrupt from the code it has to trigger using only existing Ada mechanisms. What I fear is that it would introduce either too much inefficiency or not provide for uninterruptability that may be needed by an ISR. I suppose it wouldn't hurt too much if you actually shielded the ISR beneath some hardware abstraction layer & kept it small, providing most of the "Real" work has to happen above it. (Let it grab data and propogate a message of some sort?) But then you're really not making a provision to run all of the software for an embedded system on some workstation platform in an off-line way. It would be better with a language mechanism, but I don't know if it is either too complicated or of too narrow an interest to be worth a language update. MDC Ed Falis wrote: > It's certainly possible to import the "kill" routine to raise a > signal. But of course you would have a different "interrupt" number > for native and target, as well as needing explicit code somewhere to > call kill. So the code would have to be slightly different. But I > can't really think of any magic that could hide that. > > - Ed -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried." -- G. K. Chesterton ======================================================================