[Fwd: Re: feedback requested on proposed new directive]

[Rosimildo da Silva]

Joel Sherrill wrote:
> 
> 
> Tradition.... Tradition... How did this tradition get started?
> I'll tell you... I don't know.
> 
> <apologies to Fiddler on the Roof :)>
> 
> OK.. I'll bite. :)
> 
> Every task is capable of using any API. But I understand your meaning...
> 
> We probably should borrow an idea I worked out for GNAT/RTEMS.  There is
> an RTEMS init task (API flavor is irrelevant).  It does whatever it
> takes to initialize things before calling "Ada main".  What about
> something like this?
> 
> rtems_task Init()
> {
>   int status;
> 
> #if defined(GET_ARGS)
>   gets(cmdline);
>   parse cmdline into argc, argv
> #endif
> #if defined(MOUNT_REAL_DISKS)
>   initialize disk based filesystems
> #endif
> #if defined(HAS_NETWORKING)
>   initialize networking
> #endif
> 
>   status = main( argc, argv, environp );
>   exit( status );
> }
> 
> As time goes on, I can see other initialization that would have to be
> inserted
> before main() -- network initialization is already there.  Mounting
> a real disk filesystem would be another.
> 
> [I can easily see a way to instantiate this code via something like
> confdefs.h.]


This sounds good. As long as the "init_task()" it is located alone
in a module and let people be able to use its own, if needed.



> 
> Given the above scheme it would if USE_INIT_FINI were defined in bsp.h.
> 

Yes.


> One of the network demos (ttcp?) has code to convert a string into an
> argc/argv
> type arrangement.  Then the "ttcp_main" is invoked with them.  The
> example above
> I hacked would call that code.
> 

It is ok. But, getting the string from "stdin" would be a mistake if it
is used
by default. Just my opinion here.


Rosimildo.