RE: occam REPL

[tjoccam@xxxxxxxxxxx]

> In CSP/occam
> you can develop an application specific process that interfaces between
> the
> resource requesters and the resource handling process, but that is still
> application specific (you sequenctialise the access to the resource) and
> is
> not a solution for the problem of priority inheritance. It would be nice
> if
> someone would find a solution to do away with resources as they are the
> crucial issue in real-time systems, but as long as embedded systems will
> have physical resources to protect, you will need resource management.
> It remains good design practice to solve the application issues with
> resources as much a possible at design time, but alas, there's always a
> minimum critical section.

If I follow you, you seem to be implying a conflict between occam-like
process design and resource management. I see the opposite - a conflict
between resource management and anything other than POP. The slight
extension of occam in my white paper is called "resource-oriented
programming". Of course, what you write in a POP language may be a kind of
simulator --- with details finer than the actual 1 KB of hardware will
support --- and what was prototyped as a process may end up a couple lines
of interrupt code, but that does not change any of the design principles.
Just make sure the final product exactly follows the design. The current
approach dispenses with the design. That is not better than a simulator.

Larry Dickson