this
and keywords will look like this
. I
will include references to the Ada Reference Manual in braces and in
italics, {1.1}, which denotes section 1.1. The ARM is reference 1 at the end
of this document. Another useful reference is the Lovelace on-line tutorial
which is a great way to pick up Ada basics.
I will start out by describing the Ada predefined types, and the complex types, and move onto the simple language constructs. Section 2 will start to introduce some very Ada specific topics and section 3 describes the new Ada-95 Object Oriented programming constructs. Section 5 describes the Ada tools for managing concurrency, the task and protected types, these are worth investing some time getting to grips with. Section 6 is a tour of the Ada IO library and covers some of the differences in concept and implementation between it and C stdio.
Please feel free to comment on errors, things you don't like and things you would like to see. If I don't get the comments then I can't take it forward, and the question you would like answered is almost certainly causing other people problems too.
If you are new to Ada and do not have an Ada compiler handy then why not try the GNAT Ada compiler. This compiler is based on the well known GCC C/C++ and Objective-C compiler and provides a high quality Ada-83 and Ada-95 compiler for many platforms. Here is the FTP site see if there is one for you.
One thing before we continue, most of the operators are similar, but you should notice these differences:
Operator | C/C++ | Ada |
---|---|---|
Assignment | = | := |
Equality | == | = |
NonEquality | != | /= |
PlusEquals | += | |
SubtractEquals | -= | |
MultiplyEquals | *= | |
DivisionEquals | /= | |
OrEquals | |= | |
AndEquals | &= | |
Modulus | % | mod |
Remainder | rem | |
AbsoluteValue | abs | |
Exponentiation | ** | |
Range | .. |
One of the biggest things to stop C/C++ programmers in their tracks is that Ada is case insensitive, so begin BEGIN Begin are all the same. This can be a problem when porting case sensitive C code into Ada.
Another thing to watch for in Ada source is the use of ' the tick. The tick is used to access attributes for an object, for instance the following code is used to assign to value s the size in bits of an integer.
int a = sizeof(int) * 8; a : Integer := Integer'Size;Another use for it is to access the attributes
First
and
Last
, so for an integer the range of possible values is
Integer'First to Integer'Last
. This can also be applied to
arrays so if you are passed an array and don't know the size of it you can
use these attribute values to range over it in a loop (see section
1.1.5). The tick is also used for other Ada constructs as
well as attributes, for example character literals, code statements and
qualified expressions (1.1.8).
Note that 'objects' are defined in reverse order to C/C++, the object name is first, then the object type, as in C/C++ you can declare lists of objects by seperating them with commas.
int i; int a, b, c; int j = 0; int k, l = 1; i : Integer; a, b, c : Integer; j : Integer := 0; k, l : Integer := 1;The first three declarations are the same, they create the same objects, and the third one assigns j the value 0 in both cases. However the fourth example in C leaves k undefined and creates l with the value 1. In the Ada example it should be clear that both k and l are assigned the value 1.
Another difference is in defining constants.
const int days_per_week = 7; days_per_week : constant Integer := 7; days_per_week : constant := 7;In the Ada example it is possible to define a constant without type, the compiler then chooses the most appropriate type to represent it.
Ada is a strongly typed language, in fact possibly the strongest. This means that its type model is strict and absolutely stated. In C the use of typedef introduces a new name which can be used as a new type, though the weak typing of C and even C++ (in comparison) means that we have only really introduced a very poor synonym. Consider:
typedef int INT; INT a; int b; a = b; // works, no problemThe compiler knows that they are both ints. Now consider:
type INT is new Integer; a : INT; b : Integer; a := b; -- fails.The important keyword is
new
, which really sums up the
way Ada is treating that line, it can be read as "a new type INT
has been created from the type Integer
", whereas the C line may
be interpreted as "a new name INT
has been introduced as a
synonym for int
".
This strong typing can be a problem, and so Ada also provides you with a feature for reducing the distance between the new type and its parent, consider
subtype INT is Integer; a : INT; b : Integer; a := b; -- works.The most important feature of the subtype is to constrain the parent type in some way, for example to place an upper or lower boundary for an integer value (see section below on ranges).
Long_Integer, Short_Integer, Long_Long_Integer
etc as needed.
System.Unsigned_Types
which provide such a set of types.
Ada-95 has added a modular type which specifies the maximum value, and also the feature that arithmatic is cyclic, underflow/overflow cannot occur. This means that if you have a modular type capable of holding values from 0 to 255, and its current value is 255, then incrementing it wraps it around to zero. Contrast this with range types (previously used to define unsigned integer types) in section 1.1.5 below. Such a type is defined in the form:
type BYTE is mod 256; type BYTE is mod 2**8;The first simply specifies the maximum value, the second specifies it in a more 'precise' way, and the 2**x form is often used in system programming to specify bit mask types. Note: it is not required to use 2**x, you can use any value, so 10**10 is legal also.
Standard
{A.1}
as an enumerated type (see section 1.1.5). There is an Ada equivalent of the
C set of functions in ctype.h
which is the package
Ada.Characters.Handling
.
Ada Also defines a Wide_Character
type for handling non ASCII
character sets.
Standard
as an enumerated
type (see below) as (FALSE, TRUE)
.
Standard
). There is a good set of Ada packages for string
handling, much better defined than the set provided by C, and Ada has a &
operator for string concatenation.
As in C the basis for the string is an array of characters, so you can use array slicing (see below) to extract substrings, and define strings of set length. What, unfortunatly, you cannot do is use strings as unbounded objects, hence the following.
type A_Record is record illegal : String; legal : String(1 .. 20); end record; procedure check(legal : in String);The illegal structure element is because Ada cannot use 'unconstrained' types in static declarations, so the string must be constrained by a size. Also note that the lower bound of the size must be greater than or equal to 1, the C/C++
array[4]
which defines a range 0..3
cannot be used
in Ada, 1..4
must be used. One way to specify the size is by
initialisation, for example:
Name : String := "Simon";is the same as defining
Name
as a String(1..5)
and
assigning it the value "Simon"
seperatly..
For parameter types unconstrained types are allowed, similar to passing
int array[]
in C.
To overcome the constraint problem for strings Ada has a predefined package
Ada.Strings.Unbounded
which implements a variable length string
type.
Float
and compilers
may add Long_Float
, etc. A new Float type may be defined in one
of two ways:
type FloatingPoint1 is new Float; type FloatingPoint2 is digits 5;The first simply makes a new floating point type, from the standard
Float
, with the precision and size of that type, regardless of
what it is.
The second line asks the compiler to create a new type, which is a floating point type "of some kind" with a minimum of 5 digits of precision. This is invaluable when doing numeric intensive operations and intend to port the program, you define exactly the type you need, not what you think might do today.
If we go back to the subject of the tick, you can get the number of digits which are actually used by the type by the attribute 'Digits. So having said we want a type with minimum of 5 digits we can verify this:
number_of_digits : Integer := FloatingPoint2'Digits;
Fixed point types are unusual, there is no predefined type 'Fixed' and such type must be declared in the long form:
type Fixed is delta 0.1 range -1.0 .. 1.0;This defines a type which ranges from -1.0 to 1.0 with an accuracy of 0.1. Each element, accuracy, low-bound and high-bound must be defined as a real number.
There is a specific form of fixed point types (added by Ada-95) called decimal
types. These add a clause digits
, and the range
clause becomes optional.
type Decimal is delta 0.01 digits 10;This specifies a fixed point type of 10 digits with two decimal places. The number of digits includes the decimal part and so the maximum range of values becomes
-99,999,999.99
... +99,999,999.99
type Boolean is (FALSE, TRUE);should give you a feeling for the power of the type.
You have already seen a range in use (for strings), it is expressed as
low .. high
and can be one of the most useful ways of expressing
interfaces and parameter values, for example:
type Hours is new Integer range 1 .. 12; type Hours24 is range 0 .. 23; type Minutes is range 1 .. 60;There is now no way that a user can pass us an hour outside the range we have specified, even to the extent that if we define a parameter of type
Hours24
we cannot assign a value of Hours
even
though it can only be in the range. Another feature is demonstrated, for
Hours
we have said we want to restrict an Integer
type to the given range, for the next two we have asked the compiler to
choose a type it feels appropriate to hold the given range, this is a nice
way to save a little finger tapping, but should be avoided Ada provides you
a perfect environment to specify precisely what you want, use it the first
definition leaves nothing to the imagination.
Now we come to the rules on subtypes for ranges, and we will define the two
Hours
again as follows:
type Hours24 is new range 0 .. 23; subtype Hours is Hours24 range 1 .. 12;This limits the range even further, and as you might expect a subtype cannot extend the range beyond its parent, so
range 0 .. 25
would have
been illegal.
Now we come to the combining of enumerations and ranges, so that we might have:
type All_Days is (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday); subtype Week_Days is All_Days range Monday .. Friday; subtype Weekend is All_Days range Saturday .. Sunday;We can now take a
Day
, and see if we want to go to work:
Day : All_Days := Today; if Day in Week_Days then go_to_work; end if;Or you could use the form
if Day in range Monday .. Friday
and we would not need the extra types.
Ada provides four useful attributes for enumeration type handling, note these are used slightly differently than many other attributes as they are applied to the type, not the object.
'Succ
value of an object containing Monday
is
Tuesday
.Sunday
then an
exception is raised, you cannot Succ
past the end of the
enumeration.
'Pred
value of an object containing Tuesday
is
Monday
.'Pred
of Monday
is an error.
Val(2)
is Wednesday
.'Val(0)
is the same as 'First
.
'Pos(Wednesday)
is 2
.'Last
will
work, and return Sunday
.
All_Days'Succ(Monday) = Tuesday All_Days'Pred(Tuesday) = Monday All_Days'Val(0) = Monday All_Days'First = Monday All_Days'Val(2) = Wednesday All_Days'Last = Sunday All_Days'Succ(All_Days'Pred(Tuesday)) = TuesdayAda also provides a set of 4 attributes for range types, these are intimatly associated with those above and are:
0 .. 100
then 'First
0.
'Last
is 100
.
'Length
is
actually 101
.
Some example:
char name[31]; int track[3]; int dbla[3][10]; int init[3] = { 0, 1, 2 }; typedef char[31] name_type; track[2] = 1; dbla[0][3] = 2; Name : array (0 .. 30) of Character; -- OR Name : String (1 .. 30); Track : array (0 .. 2) of Integer; DblA : array (0 .. 2) of array (0 .. 9) of Integer; -- OR DblA : array (0 .. 2,0 .. 9) of Integer; Init : array (0 .. 2) of Integer := (0, 1, 2); type Name_Type is array (0 .. 30) of Character; track(2) := 1; dbla(0,3) := 2; -- Note try this in C. a, b : Name_Type; a := b; -- will copy all elements of b into a.Simple isn't it, you can convert C arrays into Ada arrays very easily. What you don't get is all the things you can do with Ada arrays that you can't do in C/C++.
Example : array (-10 .. 10) of Integer;
array(type range low .. high)which would make Example above
array(Integer range -10 .. 10)
.
Now you can see where we're going, take an enumerated type, All_Days
and you can define an array:
Hours_Worked : array (All_Days range Monday .. Friday);
type Vector is array (Integer range <>) of Float; procedure sort_vector(sort_this : in out Vector); Illegal_Variable : Vector; Legal_Variable : Vector(1..5); subtype SmallVector is Vector(0..1); Another_Legal : SmallVector;This does allow us great flexibility to define functions and procedures to work on arrays regardless of their size, so a call to
sort_vector
could take the Legal_Variable
object or an object of type
SmallVector
, etc. Note that a variable of type
Smallvector
is constrained and so can be legally created.
Example : array (1 .. 10) of Integer; for i in Example'First .. Example'Last loop for i in Example'Range loopNote that if you have a multiple dimension array then the above notation implies that the returned values are for the first dimension, use the notation
Array_Name(dimension)'attribute
for multi-dimensional arrays.
Init : array (0 .. 3) of Integer := (0 .. 3 => 1); Init : array (0 .. 3) of Integer := (0 => 1, others => 0);The keyword
others
sets any elements not explicitly
handled.
Large : array (0 .. 100) of Integer; Small : array (0 .. 3) of Integer; -- extract section from one array into another. Small(0 .. 3) := Large(10 .. 13); -- swap top and bottom halfs of an array. Large := Large(51 .. 100) & Large(1..50);Note: Both sides of the assignment must be of the same type, that is the same dimensions with each element the same. The following is illegal.
-- extract section from one array into another. Small(0 .. 3) := Large(10 .. 33); -- ^^^^^^^^ range too big.
struct _device { int major_number; int minor_number; char name[20]; }; typedef struct _device Device; type struct_device is record major_number : Integer; minor_number : Integer; name : String(1 .. 19); end record; type Device is new struct_device;As you can see, the main difference is that the name we declare for the initial record is a type, and can be used from that point on. In C all we have declared is a structure name, we then require the additional step of typedef-ing to add a new type name.
Ada uses the same element reference syntax as C, so to access the minor_number
element of an object lp1 of type Device we write lp1.minor_number
.
Ada does allow, like C, the initialisation of record members at declaration.
In the code below we introduce a feature of Ada, the ability to name
the elements we are going to initialise. This is useful for clarity of code,
but more importantly it allows us to only initialise the bits we want.
Device lp1 = {1, 2, "lp1"}; lp1 : Device := (1, 2, "lp1"); lp2 : Device := (major_number => 1, minor_number => 3, name => "lp2"); tmp : Device := (major_number => 255, name => "tmp");When initialising a record we use an aggregate, a construct which groups together the members. This facility (unlike aggregates in C) can also be used to assign members at other times as well.
tmp : Device; -- some processing tmp := (major_number => 255, name => "tmp");This syntax can be used anywhere where parameters are passed, initialisation (as above) function/procedure calls, variants and discriminants and generics. The code above is most useful if we have a default value for minor_number, so the fact that we left it out won't matter. This is possible in Ada.
This facility improves readability and as far as most Ada programmers believe maintainability.
type struct_device is record major_number : Integer := 0; minor_number : Integer := 0; name : String(1 .. 19) := "unknown"; end record;Structures/records like this are simple, and there isn't much more to say. The more interesting problem for Ada is modelling C unions (see section 1.1.10).
Ada access types are safer, and in some ways easier to use and understand, but they do mean that a lot of C code which uses pointers heavily will have to be reworked to use some other means.
The most common use of access types is in dynamic programming, for example in linked lists.
struct _device_event { int major_number; int minor_number; int event_ident; struct _device_event* next; }; type Device_Event; type Device_Event_Access is access Device_Event; type Device_Event is record major_number : Integer := 0; minor_number : Integer := 0; event_ident : Integer := 0; next : Device_Event_Access := null; -- Note: the assignement to null is not required, -- Ada automatically initialises access types to -- null if no other value is specified. end record;The Ada code may look long-winded but it is also more expressive, the access type is declared before the record so a real type can be used for the declaration of the element next. Note: we have to forward declare the record before we can declare the access type, is this extra line worth all the moans we hear from the C/C++ community that Ada is overly verbose?
When it comes to dynamically allocating a new structure the Ada allocator syntax is much closer to C++ than to C.
Event_1 := new Device_Event; Event_1.next := new Device_Event'(1, 2, EV_Paper_Low, null);There are three things of note in the example above. Firstly the syntax, we can say directly that we want a new thing, none of this malloc rubbish. Secondly that there is no difference in syntax between access of elements of a statically allocated record and a dynamically allocated one. We use the
record.element
syntax for both. Lastly that we can initialise the values
as we create the object, the tick is used again, not as an attribute, but with
parenthases in order to form a qualified expresssion.
Ada allows you to assign between access types, and as you would expect it only changes what the access type points to, not the contents of what it points to. One thing to note again, Ada allows you to assign one structure to another if they are of the same type, and so a syntax is required to assign the contents of an access type, its easier to read than write, so:
dev1, dev2 : Device_Event; pdv1, pdv2 : Device_Event_Access; dev1 := dev2; -- all elements copied. pdv1 := pdv2; -- pdv1 now points to contents of pdv2. pdv1.all := pdv2.all; -- !!What you may have noticed is that we have not discussed the operator to free the memory we have allocated, the equivalent of C's free() or C++'s delete.
There is a good reason for this, Ada does not have one.
To digress for a while, Ada was designed as a language to support garbage collection, that is the runtime would manage deallocation of no longer required dynamic memory. However at that time garbage collection was slow, required a large overhead in tracking dynamic memory and tended to make programs irratic in performance, slowing as the garbage collector kicks in. The language specification therefore states {13.11} "An implementation need not support garbage collection ...". This means that you must, as in C++ manage your own memory deallocation.
Ada requires you to use the generic procedure Unchecked_Deallocation
(see 1.3.4) to deallocate a dynamic object. This procedure
must be instantiated for each dynamic type and should not (ideally) be declared
on a public package spec, ie provide the client with a deallocation procedure
which uses Unchecked_Deallocation
internally.
type Thing is new Integer; an_Integer : Integer; a_Thing : Thing; an_Integer := a_Thing; -- illegal an_Integer := Integer(a_Thing);This can only be done between similar types, the compiler will not allow such coersion between very different types, for this you need the generic procedure
Unchecked_Conversion
(see 1.3.4) which takes
as an argument one type, and returns another. The only constraint on this is
that they must be the same size.
In C/C++ there is the most formidable syntax for defining pointers to functions and so the Ada syntax should come as a nice surprise:
typedef int (*callback_func)(int param1, int param2); type Callback_Func is access function(param_1 : in Integer; param_2 : in Integer) return Integer;
type Event_Item is record Event_ID : Integer; Event_Info : String(1 .. 80); end record; type Event_Log(Max_Size : Integer) is record Log_Opened : Date_Type; Events : array (1 .. Max_Size) of Event_Item; end record;First we declare a type to hold our event information in. We then declare a type which is a log of such events, this log has a maximum size, and rather than the C answer, define an array large enough for the maximum ever, or resort to dynamic programming the Ada approach is to instantiate the record with a max value and at time of instantiation define the size of the array.
My_Event_Log : Event_Log(1000);If it is known that nearly all event logs are going to be a thousand items in size, then you could make that a default value, so that the following code is identical to that above.
type Event_Log(Max_Size : Integer := 1000) is record Log_Opened : Date_Type Events : array (Integer range 1 .. Max_Size) of Event_Item; end record; My_Event_Log : Event_Log;Again this is another way in which Ada helps, when defining an interface, to state precisely what we want to provide.
Ada variant records allow you to define a record which has 2 or more blocks of data of which only one is visible at any time. The visibility of the block is determined by a discriminant which is then 'cased'.
type Transport_Type is (Sports, Family, Van); type Car(Type : Transport_Type) is record Registration_Date : Date_Type; Colour : Colour_Type; case Type is when Sports => Soft_Top : Boolean; when Family => Number_Seats : Integer; Rear_Belts : Boolean; when Van => Cargo_Capacity: Integer; end case; end record;So if you code
My_Car : Car(Family);
then you can ask for the
number of seats in the car, and whether the car has seat belts in the rear,
but you cannot ask if it is a soft top, or what its cargo capacity is.
I guess you've seen the difference between this and C unions. In a C union representation of the above any block is visible regardless of what type of car it is, you can easily ask for the cargo capacity of a sports car and C will use the bit pattern of the boolean to provide you with the cargo capacity. Not good.
To simplify things you can subtype the variant record with types which define the variant (note in the example the use of the designator for clarity).
subtype Sports_Car is Car(Sports); subtype Family_Car is Car(Type => Family); subtype Small_Van is Car(Type => Van);
Unlike C++ where an exception is identified by its type in Ada they are uniquely identified by name. To define an exception for use, simply
parameter_out_of_range : Exception;These look and feel like constants, you cannot assign to them etc, you can only raise an exception and handle an exception.
Exceptions can be argued to be a vital part of the safety of Ada code, they cannot easily be ignored, and can halt a system quickly if something goes wrong, far faster than a returned error code which in most cases is completely ignored.
type BYTE is range 0 .. 255; for BYTE use 8;This first example shows the most common form of system representation clause, the size attribute. We have asked the compiler to give us a range, from 0 to 255 and the compiler is at liberty to provide the best type available to hold the representation. We are forcing this type to be 8 bits in size.
type DEV_Activity is (READING, WRITING, IDLE); for DEV_Activity use (READING => 1, WRITING => 2, IDLE => 3);Again this is useful for system programming it gives us the safety of enumeration range checking, so we can only put the correct value into a variable, but does allow us to define what the values are if they are being used in a call which expects specific values.
type DEV_Available is BYTE; for DEV_Available use at 16#00000340#;This example means that all objects of type
DEV_Available
are
placed at memory address 340 (Hex). This placing of data items can be done on
a per object basis by using:
type DEV_Available is BYTE; Avail_Flag : DEV_Available; for Avail_Flag'Address use 16#00000340#;Note the address used Ada's version of the C 0x340 notation, however the general form is
base#number#
where the base can be anything,
including 2, so bit masks are real easy to define, for example:
Is_Available : constant BYTE := 2#1000_0000#; Not_Available: constant BYTE := 2#0000_0000#;Another feature of Ada is that any underscores in numeric constants are ignored, so you can break apart large numbers for readability.
type DEV_Status is 0 .. 15; type DeviceDetails is record status : DEV_Activity; rd_stat: DEV_Status; wr_stat: DEV_Status; end record; for DeviceDetails use record at mod 2; status at 0 range 0 .. 7; rd_stat at 1 range 0 .. 3; wr_stat at 1 range 4 .. 7; end record;This last example is the most complex, it defines a simple range type, and a structure. It then defines two things to the compiler, first the mod clause sets the byte packing for the structure, in this case back on two-byte boundaries. The second part of this structure defines exactly the memory image of the record and where each element occurs. The number after the 'at' is the byte offset and the range, or size, is specified in number of bits.
>From this you can see that the whole structure is stored in two bytes where the first byte is stored as expected, but the second and third elements of the record share the second byte, low nibble and high nibble.
This form becomes very important a little later on.
Firstly we must look at the two ways unions are identified. Unions are used to represent the data in memory in more than one way, the programmer must know which way is relevant at any point in time. This variant identifier can be inside the union or outside, for example:
struct _device_input { int device_id; union { type_1_data from_type_1; type_2_data from_type_2; } device_data; }; void get_data_func(_device_input* from_device); union device_data { type_1_data from_type_1; type_2_data from_type_2; }; void get_data_func(int *device_id, device_data* from_device);In the first example all the data required is in the structure, we call the function and get back a structure which holds the union and the identifier which denotes which element of the union is active. In the second example only the union is returned and the identifier is seperate.
The next step is to decide whether, when converting such code to Ada, you wish to maintain simply the concept of the union, or whether you are required to maintain the memory layout also. Note: the second choice is usually only if your Ada code is to pass such a structure to a C program or get one from it.
If you are simply retaining the concept of the union then you would not use the second form, use the first form and use a variant record.
type Device_ID is new Integer; type Device_Input(From_Device : Device_ID) is record case From_Device is when 1 => From_Type_1 : Type_1_Data; when 2 => From_Type_2 : Type_2_Data; end case; end record;The above code is conceptually the same as the first piece of C code, however it will probably look very different, you could use the following representation clause to make it look like the C code (type sizes are not important).
for Device_Input use record From_Device at 0 range 0 .. 15; From_Type_1 at 2 range 0 .. 15; From_Type_2 at 2 range 0 .. 31; end record;You should be able to pass this to and from C code now. You could use a representation clause for the second C case above, but unless you really must pass it to some C code then re-code it as a variant record.
We can also use the abilities of Unchecked_Conversion
to convert
between different types (see 1.3.4). This allows us to
write the following:
type Type_1_Data is record Data_1 : Integer; end record; type Type_2_Data is record Data_1 : Integer; end record; function Type_1_to_2 is new Unchecked_Conversion (Source => Type_1_data, Target => Type_2_Data);This means that we can read/write items of type
Type_1_Data
and
when we need to represent the data as Type_2_Data
we can simply
write
Type_1_Object : Type_1_Data := ReadData; : Type_2_Object : Type_2_Data := Type_1_to_2(Type_1_Object);
Note: All Ada statements can be qualified by a name, this be discussed further in the section on Ada looping constructs, however it can be used anywhere to improve readability, for example:
begin Init_Code: begin Some_Code; end Init_Code; Main_Loop: loop if Some_Value then exit loop Main_Loop; end if; end loop Main_Loop; Term_Code: begin Some_Code; end Term_Code; end A_Block;
{ declarations statements } declare declarations begin statement end;
Note: Ada does not require brackets around the expressions used in if, case or loop statements.
if (expression) { statement } else { statement } if expression then statement elsif expression then statement else statement end if;
switch (expression) { case value: statement default: statement } case expression is when value => statement when others => statement end case;There is a point worth noting here. In C the end of the statement block between case statements is a break statement, otherwise we drop through into the next case. In Ada this does not happen, the end of the statement is the next case.
This leads to a slight problem, it is not uncommon to find a switch statement in C which looks like this:
switch (integer_value) { case 1: case 2: case 3: case 4: value_ok = 1; break; case 5: case 6: case 7: break; }This uses ranges (see 1.1.5) to select a set of values for a single operation, Ada also allows you to or values together, consider the following:
case integer_value is when 1 .. 4 => value_ok := 1; when 5 | 6 | 7 => null; end case;You will also note that in Ada there must be a statement for each case, so we have to use the Ada
null
statement as the target of
the second selection.
loop ... end
construct
loop statement end loop;
while (expression) { statement } while expression loop statement end loop;
do { statement } while (expression) -- no direct Ada equivalent.
for (init-statement ; expression-1 ; loop-statement) { statement } for ident in range loop statement end loop;However Ada adds some nice touches to this simple statement.
Firstly, the variable ident is actually declared by its appearance in the loop, it is a new variable which exists for the scope of the loop only and takes the correct type according to the specified range.
Secondly you will have noticed that to loop for 1 to 10 you can write the following Ada code:
for i in 1 .. 10 loop null; end loop;What if you want to loop from 10 down to 1? In Ada you cannot specify a range of
10 .. 1
as this is defined as a 'null range'. Passing a null
range to a for loop causes it to exit immediatly. The code to iterate over a
null range such as this is:
for i in reverse 1 .. 10 loop null; end loop;
while (expression) { if (expression1) { continue; } if (expression2) { break; } }This code shows how break and continue are used, you have a loop which takes an expression to determine general termination procedure. Now let us assume that during execution of the loop you decide that you have completed what you wanted to do and may leave the loop early, the break forces a 'jump' to the next statement after the closing brace of the loop. A continue is similar but it takes you to the first statement after the opening brace of the loop, in effect it allows you to reevaluate the loop.
In Ada there is no continue, and break is now exit.
while expression loop if expression2 then exit; end if; end loop;The Ada exit statement however can combine the expression used to decide that it is required, and so the code below is often found.
while expression loop exit when expression2; end loop;This leads us onto the do loop, which can now be coded as:
loop statement exit when expression; end loop;Another useful feature which C and C++ lack is the ability to 'break' out of nested loops, consider
while ((!feof(file_handle) && (!percent_found)) { for (char_index = 0; buffer[char_index] != '\n'; char_index++) { if (buffer[char_index] == '%') { percent_found = 1; break; } // some other code, including get next line. } }This sort of code is quite common, an inner loop spots the termination condition and has to signal this back to the outer loop. Now consider
Main_Loop: while not End_Of_File(File_Handle) loop for Char_Index in Buffer'Range loop exit when Buffer(Char_Index) = NEW_LINE; exit Main_Loop when Buffer(Char_Index) = PERCENT; end loop; end loop Main_Loop;
return value; // C++ return return value; -- Ada return
label: goto label; <<label>> goto label;
In C++ there is no exception type, when you raise an exception you pass out any sort of type, and selection of the exception is done on its type. In Ada as seen above there is a 'psuedo-type' for exceptions and they are then selected by name.
Firstly lets see how you catch an exception, the code below shows the basic structure used to protect statement1, and execute statement2 on detection of the specified exception.
try { statement1 } catch (declaration) { statement2 } begin statement1 exception when ident => statement2 when others => statement2 end;Let us now consider an example, we will call a function which we know may raise a particular exception, but it may raise some we don't know about, so we must pass anything else back up to whoever called us.
try { function_call(); } catch (const char* string_exception) { if (!strcmp(string_exception, "the_one_we_want")) { handle_it(); } else { throw; } } catch (...) { throw; } begin function_call; exception when the_one_we_want => handle_it; when others => raise; end;This shows how much safer the Ada version is, we know exactly what we are waiting for and can immediately process it. In the C++ case all we know is that an exception of type 'const char*' has been raised, we must then check it still further before we can handle it.
You will also notice the similarity between the Ada exception catching code and the Ada case statement, this also extends to the fact that the when statement can catch multiple exceptions. Ranges of exceptions are not possible, however you can or exceptions, to get:
begin function_call; exception when the_one_we_want | another_possibility => handle_it; when others => raise; end;This also shows the basic form for raising an exception, the throw statement in C++ and the raise statement in Ada. Both normally raise a given exception, but both when invoked with no exception reraise the last one. To raise the exception above consider:
throw (const char*)"the_one_we_want"; raise the_one_we_want;
return_type func_name(parameters); return_type func_name(parameters) { declarations statement } function func_name(parameters) return return_type; function func_name(parameters) return return_type is declarations begin statement end func_nameLet us now consider a special kind of function, one which does not return a value. In C/C++ this is represented as a return type of void, in Ada this is called a procedure.
void func_name(parameters); procedure func_name(parameters);Next we must consider how we pass arguments to functions.
void func1(int by_value); void func2(int* by_address); void func3(int& by_reference); // C++ only.These type of parameters are I hope well understood by C and C++ programmers, their direct Ada equivalents are:
type int is new Integer; type int_star is access int; procedure func1(by_value : in int); procedure func2(by_address : in out int_star); procedure func3(by_reference : in out int);Finally a procedure or function which takes no parameters can be written in two ways in C/C++, though only one is Ada.
void func_name(); void func_name(void); int func_name(void); procedure func_name; function func_name return Integer;Ada also provides two features which will be understood by C++ programmers, possibly not by C programmers, and a third I don't know how C does without:
function Day return All_Days; function Day(a_date : in Date_Type) return All_Days;The first returns you the day of week, of today, the second the day of week from a given date. They are both allowed, and both visible. The compiler decides which one to use by looking at the types given to it when you call it.
function "+"(Left, Right : in Integer) return Integer;Available operators are:
= | < | <= | > | >= |
+ | - | & | abs | not |
* | / | mod | rem | ** |
and | or | xor |
|
|
void func(int by_value, int* by_pointer, int& by_reference);Ada provides two optional keywords to specify how parameters are passed,
in
and out
. These are used like this:
procedure proc(Parameter : in Integer); procedure proc(Parameter : out Integer); procedure proc(Parameter : in out Integer); procedure proc(Parameter : Integer);If these keywords are used then the compiler can protect you even more, so if you have an
out
parameter it will warn you if you use it
before it has been set, also it will warn you if you assign to an in
parameter.
Note that you cannot mark parameters with out
in functions
as functions are used to return values, such side affects are disallowed.
procedure Create (File : in out File_Type; Mode : in File_Mode := Inout_File; Name : in String := ""; Form : in String := "");This example is to be found in each of the Ada file based IO packages, it opens a file, given the file 'handle' the mode, name of the file and a system independant 'form' for the file. You can see that the simplest invokation of Create is
Create(File_Handle);
which simply provides the handle
and all other parameters are defaulted (In the Ada library a file name of ""
implies opening a temporary file). Now suppose that we wish to provide the
name of the file also, we would have to write Create(File_Handle, Inout_File,
"text.file");
wouldn't we? The Ada answer is no. By using designators as
has been demonstrated above we could use the form:
Create(File => File_Handle, Name => "text.file");and we can leave the mode to pick up its default. This skipping of parameters is a uniquely Ada feature.
procedure Sort(Sort_This : in out An_Array) is procedure Swap(Item_1, Item_2 : in out Array_Type) is begin end Swap; begin end Sort;
procedure increment(A_Value : A_Type); procedure increment (A_Value : in out A_Type; By : in Integer := 1);If we call increment with one parameter which of the two above is called? Now the compiler will show such things up, but it does mean you have to think carefully and make sure you use defaults carefully.
Ada is also commonly assumed to be a military language, with the US Department of Defense its prime advocate, this is not the case, a number of commercial and government developments have now been implemented in Ada. Ada is an excellent choice if you wish to spend your development time solving your customers problems, not hunting bugs in C/C++ which an Ada compiler would not have allowed.
Ada-95 has introduced these new features, Object Oriented programming through tagged types and procedural types which make it more difficult to statically prove an Ada-95 program, but the language designers decided that such features merited their inclusion in the language to further another goal, that of high reuse.
Constraint_Error
null
access type.
Program_Error
Storage_Error
new
could not
be satisfied due to lack of memory.
Tasking_Error
Supress
which can be used to
stop certain run-time checks taking place. The pragma works from that point
to the end of the innermost enclosing scope, or the end of the scope of the
named object (see below).
Access_Check
Constraint_Error
on dereference of a null
access value.
Accessibility_Check
Program_Error
on access to inaccessible object or
subprogram.
Discriminant_Check
Constraint_Error
on access to incorrect component in a
discriminant record.
Division_Check
Constraint_Error
on divide by zero.
Elaboration_Check
Program_Error
on unelaborated package or subprogram
body.
Index_Check
Constraint_Error
on out of range array index.
Length_Check
Constraint_Error
on array length violation.
Overflow_Check
Constraint_Error
on overflow from numeric operation.
Range_Check
Constraint_Error
on out of range scalar value.
Storage_Check
Storage_Error
if not enough storage to satisfy a
new
call.
Tag_Check
Constraint_Error
if object has an invalid tag for
operation.
pragma Suppress(Access_Check); pragma Suppress(Access_Check, On => My_Type_Ptr);The first use of the pragma above turns off checking for
null
access values throughout the code (for the lifetime of the suppress), whereas
the second only suppresses the check for the named data item.
The point of this section is that by default all of these checks are enabled, and so any such errors will be trapped.
Unchecked_Conversion
generic type Source (<>) is limited private; type Target (<>) is limited private; function Ada.Unchecked_Conversion (Source_Object : Source) return Target;and should be instantiated like the example below (taken from one of the Ada-95 standard library packages
Ada.Interfaces.C
).
function Character_To_char is new Unchecked_Conversion (Character, char);and can then be used to convert and Ada character to a C char, thus
A_Char : Interfaces.C.char := Character_To_char('a');
Unchecked_Deallocation
generic type Object (<>) is limited private; type Name is access Object; procedure Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation (X : in out Name);this function, instantiated with two parameters, only requires one for operation,
type My_Type is new Integer; type My_Ptr is access My_Type; procedure Free is new Unchecked_Deallocation (My_Type, My_Ptr); Thing : My_Ptr := new My_Type; Free(Thing);
It is worth first looking at the role of header files in C/C++. Header files
are simply program text which by virtue of the preprocessor are inserted into
the compilers input stream. The #include
directive knows nothing
about what it is including and can lead to all sorts of problems, such as
people who #include "thing.c"
. This sharing of code by the
preprocessor lead to the #ifdef
construct as you would have
different interfaces for different people. The other problem is that C/C++
compilations can sometime take forever because a included b included c ... or
the near fatal a included a included a ...
Stroustrup has tried ref [9] (in vain, as far as I can see) to convince C++ programmers to remove dependance on the preprocessor but all the drawbacks are still there.
Any Ada package on the other hand consists of two parts, the specification (header) and body (code). The specification however is a completely stand alone entity which can be compiled on its own and so must include specifications from other packages to do so. An Ada package body at compile time must refer to its package specification to ensure legal declarations, but in many Ada environments it would look up a compiled version of the specification.
The specification contains an explicit list of the visible components of a
package and so there can be no internal knowledge exploited as is often
the case in C code, ie module a contains a functions aa() but does not export
it through a header file, module b knows how a is coded and so uses the
extern
keyword to declare knowledge of it, and use it. C/C++
programmers therefore have to mark private functions and data as static
.
--file example.ads, the package specification. package example is : : end example; --file example.adb, the package body. package body example is : : end example;
#include "example.h"
, the
Ada package specification has a two stage process.
Working with the example package above let us assume that we need to include
another package, say My_Specs
into this package so that it may be
used. Firstly where do you insert it? Like C, package specifications can be
inserted into either a specification or body depending on who is the client.
Like a C header/code relationship any package included in the specification of
package A is visible to the body of A, but not to clients of A. Each package
is a seperate entity.
-- Specification for package example with Project_Specs; package example is type My_Type is new Project_Spec.Their_Type; end example; -- Body for package example with My_Specs; package body example is type New_Type_1 is new My_Specs.Type_1; type New_Type_2 is new Project_Specs.Type_1; end example;
You can see here the basic visibility rules, the specification has to include
Project_Specs
so that it can declare My_Type
. The
body automatically inherits any packages included in its spec, so that you
can see that although the body does not include Project_Specs
that package is used in the declaration of New_Type_1
. The body
also includes another package My_Specs
to declare the new type
New_Type_2
, the specification is unaware of this include and so
cannot use My_Specs
to declare new types. In a similar way an
ordinary client of the package example
cannot use the inclusion of
Project_Specs
, they would have to include it themselves.
To use an item, say a the type Type_1
you must name it
My_Specs.Type_1
, in effect you have included the package name,
not its contents. To get the same effect as the C #include
you
must also add another statement to make:
with My_Specs; use My_Specs package body example is : : end example;
It is usual in Ada to put the with and the use on the same line, for clarity.
There is much more to be said about Ada packages, but that should be enough to
start with. There is a special form of the use
statement
which can simply include an element (types only) from a package, consider:
use type Ada.Calendar.Time;
In C this is done by presenting the 'private type' as a void*
which means that you cannot know anything about it, but implies that no one
can do any form of type checking on it. In C++ we can forward declare classes
and so provide an anonymous class type.
/* C code */ typedef void* list; list create(void); // C++ class Our_List { public: Our_List(void); private: class List_Rep; List_Rep* Representation; };You can see that as a C++ programmer you have the advantage that when writing the implementation of Our_List and its internal representation
List_Rep
you have all the advantages of type checking, but the
client still knows absolutely nothing about how the list is structured.
In Ada this concept is formalised into the 'private part' of a package. This private part is used to define items which are forward declared as private.
package Our_List is type List_Rep is private; function Create return List_Rep; private type List_Rep is record -- some data end record; end Our_List;As you can see the way the Ada private part is usually used the representation of
List_Rep
is exposed, but because it is a private type the
only operations that the client may use are = and /=, all other operations
must be provided by functions and procedures in the package. Note: we
can even restrict use of = and /= by declaring the type as limited
private
when you wish to have no predefined operators available.
You may not in the public part of the package specification declare variables of the private type as the representation is not yet known, we can declare constants of the type, but you must declare them in both places, forward reference them in the public part with no value, and then again in the private part to provide a value:
package Example is type A is private; B : constant A; private type A is new Integer; B : constant A := 0; end Example;To get exactly the same result as the C++ code above then you must go one step further, you must not expose the representation of
List_Rep
, and
so you might use:
package Our_List is type List_Access is limited private; function Create return List_Access; private type List_Rep; -- opaque type type List_Access is access List_Rep; end Our_List;We now pass back to the client an access type, which points to a 'deferred incomplete type' whose representation is only required to be exposed in the package body.
package Outer is package Inner_1 is end Inner_1; package Inner_2 is end Inner_2; private end Outer;Ada-95 has added to this the possibility to define child packages outside the physical scope of a package, thus:
package Outer is package Inner_1 is end Inner_1; end Outer; package Outer.Inner_2 is end Outer.Inner_2;As you can see
Inner_2
is still a child of outer but can be created
at some later date, by a different team.
Consider:
with Outer; with Outer.Inner_1; package New_Package is OI_1 renames Outer.Inner_1; type New_type is new OI_1.A_Type; end New_Package;The use of
OI_1
not only saves us a lot of typing, but if outer
were the package Sorting_Algorithms
, and Inner_1
was Insertion_Sort
, then we could have
Sort renames Sorting_Algorithms.Insertion_Sort
and then at some
later date if you decide that a quick sort is more approriate then you simply
change the renames clause, and the rest of the package spec stays exactly the
same.
Similarly if you want to include 2 functions from two different package with the same name then, rather than relying on overloading, or to clarify your code text you could:
with Package1; function Function1 return Integer renames Package1.Function; with Package2; function Function2 return Integer renames Package2.Function;Another example of a renames clause is where you are using some complex structure and you want to in effect use a synonym for it during some processing. In the example below we have a device handler structure which contains some procedure types which we need to execute in turn. The first example contains a lot of text which we don't really care about, so the second removes most of it, thus leaving bare the real work we are attempting to do.
for device in Device_Map loop Device_Map(device).Device_Handler.Request_Device; Device_Map(device).Device_Handler.Process_Function(Process_This_Request); Device_Map(device).Device_Handler.Relinquish_Device; end loop; for device in Device_Map loop declare Device_Handler : Device_Type renames Device_Map(device).Device_Handler; begin Device_Handler.Request_Device; Device_Handler.Process_Function(Process_This_Request); Device_Handler.Relinquish_Device; end; end loop;
class
. A class is an extension
of the existing struct
construct which we have reviewed in section
1.1.7 above. The difference with a class is that a class not only contains
data (member attributes) but code as well (member functions). A class might
look like:
class A_Device { public: A_Device(char*, int, int); char* Name(void); int Major(void); int Minor(void); protected: char* name; int major; int minor; };This defines a class called A_Device, which encapsulates a Unix-like /dev entry. Such an entry has a name and a major and minor number, the actual data items are protected so a client cannot alter them, but the client can see them by calling the public interface functions.
The code above also introduces a constructor, a function with the same name as
the class which is called whenever the class is created. In C++ these may be
overloaded and are called either by the new
operator, or in local
variable declarations as below.
A_Device lp1("lp1", 10, 1); A_Device* lp1; lp1 = new A_Device("lp1", 10, 1);Creates a new device object called
lp1
and sets up the name and
major/minor numbers.
Ada has also extended its equivalent of a struct, the record
but
does not directly attach the member functions to it. First the Ada equivalent
of the above class is
package Devices is type Device is tagged private; type Device_Type is access Device; function Create(Name : String; Major : Integer; Minor : Integer) return Device_Type; function Name(this : Device_Type) return String; function Major(this : Device_Type) return Integer; function Minor(this : Device_Type) return Integer; private type Device is tagged record Name : String(1 .. 20); Major : Integer; Minor : Integer; end record; end Devices;and the equivalent declaration of an object would be:
lp1 : Devices.Device_Type := Devices.Create("lp1", 10, 1);
tagged
to the definition of the
type Device makes it a class in C++ terms. The tagged type is simply an
extension of the Ada-83 record type but (in the same way C++'s class
is an extension of C's struct
) which includes a 'tag' which can
identify not only its own type but its place in the type hierarchy.
The tag can be accessed by the attribute 'Tag
but should only
be used for comparison, ie
dev1, dev2 : Device; if dev1'Tag = dev2'Tag thenthis can identify the isa relationship between two objects.
Another important attribute 'Class
exists which is used in type
declarations to denote the class-wide type, the inheritence tree rooted
at that type, ie
type Device_Class is Device'Class; -- or more normally type Device_Class is access Device'Class;The second type denotes a pointer to objects of type
Device
and
any objects whos type has been inherited from Device
.
char* name
directly maps into Name : String
.
A pure virtual function maps onto a virtual member function with the keywords
is abstract
before the semicolon. When any pure virtual
member functions exist the tagged type they refer to must also be identified
as abstract. Also, if an abstract tagged type has been introduced which has
no data, then the following shorthand can be used:
type Root_Type is abstract tagged null record;
Create
function which creates a new object and returns it. If
you intend to use this method then the most important thing to remember is to
use the same name throughout, Create Copy Destroy
etc are all
useful conventions.
Ada does provide a library package Ada.Finalization
which can
provide constructor/destructor like facilities for tagged types.
Note: See ref 6.
For example, let us now inherit the device type above to make a tape device, firstly in C++
class A_Tape : public A_Device { public: A_Tape(char*, int, int); int Block_Size(void); protected: int block_size; };Now let us look at the example in Ada.
package Device.Tapes is type Tape is new device with private; type Tape_Type is access Tape; function Create(Name : String; Major : Integer; Minor : Integer) return Tape_Type; function Block_Size(this : Tape_Type) return Integer; private type Tape is new Device with record Block_Size : Integer; end record; end Device.Tapes;Ada does not directly support multiple inheritance, ref [7] has an example of how to synthesise mulitple inheritance.
Device
comparison. In this example the C++ class provided a public interface and a
protected one, the Ada equivalent then provided an interface in the public
part and the tagged type declaration in the private part. Because of the rules
for child packages (see 2.4) a child of the
Devices
package can see the private part and so can use the
definition of the Device
tagged type.
Top mimic C++ private interfaces you can choose to use the method above, which in effect makes them protected, or you can make them really private by using opaque types (see 2.3).
class base_device { public: char* name(void) const; int major(void) const; int minor(void) const; enum { block, character, special } io_type; io_type type(void) const; char read(void) = 0; void write(char) = 0; static char* type_name(void); protected: char* _name; int _major; int _minor; static const io_type _type; base_device(void); private: int _device_count; };The class above shows off a number of C++ features,
package Devices is type Device is abstract tagged limited private; type Device_Type is access Device; type Device_Class is access Device'Class; type IO_Type is (Block, Char, Special); function Name(this : in Device_Type) return String; function Major(this : in Device_Type) return Integer; function Minor(this : in Device_Type) return Integer; function IOType(this : in Device_Type) return IO_Type; function Read(this : Device_Class) return Character is abstract; procedure Write(this : Device_Class; Output : Character) is abstract function Type_Name return String; private type Device_Count; type Device_Private is access Device_Count; type Device is abstract tagged limited record Name : String(1 .. 20); Major : Integer; Minor : Integer; Count : Device_Private; end record; Const_IO_Type : constant IO_Type := special; Const_Type_Name : constant String := "Device"; end Devices;
void sort(int *array, int num_elements);however when you come to sort an array of structures you either have to rewrite the function, or you end up with a generic sort function which looks like this:
void sort(void *array, int element_size, int element_count, int (*compare)(void* el1, void *el2));This takes a bland address for the start of the array user supplied parameters for the size of each element and the number of elements and a function which compares two elements. C does not have strong typing, but you have just stripped away any help the compiler might be able to give you by using
void*
.
Now let us consider an Ada generic version of the sort function:
generic type index_type is (<>); type element_type is private; type element_array is array (index_type range <>) of element_type; with function "<" (el1, el2 : element_type) return Boolean; procedure Sort(the_array : in out element_array);This shows us quite a few features of Ada generics and is a nice place to start, for example note that we have specified a lot of detail about the thing we are going to sort, it is an array, for which we don't know the bounds so it is specified as
range <>
. We also can't expect that the range is an
integer range and so we must also make the range type a parameter,
index_type
. Then we come onto the element type, this is simply specified
as private, so all we know is that we can test equality and assign one to
another. Now that we have specified exactly what it is we are going to sort we
must ask for a function to compare two elements, similar to C we must ask the
user to supply a function, however in this case we can ask for an operator
function and notice that we use the keyword with
before
the function.
I think that you should be able to see the difference between the Ada code and C code as far as readability (and therefore maintainability) are concerned and why, therefore, Ada promotes the reuse philosophy.
Now let's use our generic to sort some of MyType
s.
MyArray : array (Integer 0 .. 100) of MyType; function LessThan(el1, el2 : MyType) return Boolean; procedure SortMyType is new Sort(Integer, MyType, MyArray, LessThan); SortMyType(MyArray);The first two lines simply declare the array we are going to sort and a little function which we use to compare two elements (note: no self respecting Ada programmer would define a function
LessThan
when they can use
"<", this is simply for this example).
We then go on to instantiate the generic procedure and declare that we have an
array called MyArray
of type MyType
using an
Integer
range and we have a function to compare two elements.
Now that the compiler has instantiated the generic we can simply call it using
the new name.
Note: The Ada compiler instantiates the generic and will ensure type safety throughout.
generic type Element_Type is private; package Ada.Direct_IO isIs the standard method for writing out binary data structures, and so one could write out to a file:
type My_Struct is record ... end record; package My_Struct_IO is new Ada.Direct_IO(My_Struct); use My_Struct_IO; Item : My_Struct; File : My_Struct_IO; ... My_Struct_IO.Write(File, Item);Note: see section 5.2 for a more detailed study of these packages and how they are used.
limited
then even these abilities are unavailable.
String
. Ada-95 does not allow
the instantiation of generics with unconstrained types, unless you use this
syntax in which case you cannot declare data items of this type.
0 .. 100
.
with Generic_Tree; generic with package A_Tree is new Generic_Tree(<>); package Tree_Walker is -- some code. end Tree_Walker;This says that we have some package called Generic_Tree which is a generic package implementing a tree of generic items. We want to be able to walk any such tree and so we say that we have a new generic package which takes a parameter which must be an instantiated package. ie
package AST is new Generic_Tree(Syntax_Element); package AST_Print is new Tree_Walker(AST);
write()
which takes any old thing and puts it out to a file, how can you write a
function which will take any parameter, even types which will be introduced
after it has been completed. Ada-83 took a two pronged approach to IO, with
the package Text_IO
for simple, textual input output, and the
packages Sequential_IO
and Direct_IO
which are
generic packages for binary output of structured data.
The most common problem for C and C++ programmers is the lack of the printf family of IO functions. There is a good reason for their absence in Ada, the use in C of variable arguments, the '...' at the end of the printf function spec. Ada cannot support such a construct as the type of each parameter is unknown.
Ada.Text_IO
. This provides a set
of overloaded functions called Put
and Get
to read
and write to the screen or to simple text files. There are also functions to
open and close such files, check end of file conditions and to do line and
page management.
A simple program below uses Text_IO
to print a message to the
screen, including numerics! These are achieved by using the types attribute
'Image
which gives back a String representation of a value.
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO; procedure Test_IO is begin Put_Line("Test Starts Here >"); Put_Line("Integer is " & Integer'Image(2)); Put_Line("Float is " & Float'Image(2.0)); Put_Line("Test Ends Here"); end Test_IO;It is also possible to use one of the generic child packages of
Ada.
Text_IO
such as Ada.Text_IO.Integer_IO
which can be
instantiated with a particular type to provide type safe textual IO.
with Ada.Text_IO; type My_Integer is new Integer; package My_Integer_IO is new Ada.Text_IO.Integer_IO(My_Integer); use My_Integer_IO;
with Ada.Direct_IO; package A_Database is type File_Header is record Magic_Number : Special_Stamp; Number_Of_Records : Record_Number; First_Deleted : Record_Number; end record; type Row is record Key : String(1 .. 80); Data : String(1 .. 255); end record; package Header_IO is new Direct_IO (File_Header); use Header_IO; package Row_IO is new Direct_IO (Row); use Record_IO; end A_Database;Now that we have some instantiated packages we can read and write records and headers to and from a file. However we want each database file to consist of a header followed by a number of rows, so we try the following
declare Handle : Header_IO.File_Type; A_Header : File_Header; A_Row : Row; begin Header_IO.Open(File => Handle, Name => "Test"); Header_IO.Write(Handle, A_Header); Row_IO.Write(Handle, A_Row); Header_IO.Close(Handle); end;The obvious error is that
Handle
is defined as a type exported
from the Header_IO
package and so cannot be passed to the procedure
Write
from the package Row_IO
. This strong typing
means that both Sequential_IO
and Direct_IO
are
designed only to work on files containg all elements of the same type.
When designing a package, if you want to avoid this sort of problem (the designers of these packages did intend this restriction) then embed the generic part within an enclosing package, thus
package generic_IO is type File_Type is limited private; procedure Create(File : File_Type .... procedure Close ..... generic Element_Type is private; package Read_Write is procedure Read(File : File_Type; Element : Element_Type ... procedure Write ..... end Read_Write; end generic_IO;Which would make our database package look something like
with generic_IO; package A_Database is type File_Header is record Magic_Number : Special_Stamp; Number_Of_Records : Record_Number; First_Deleted : Record_Number; end record; type Row is record Key : String(1 .. 80); Data : String(1 .. 255); end record; package Header_IO is new generic_IO.Read_Write (File_Header); use Header_IO; package Row_IO is new generic_IO.Read_Write (Row); use Record_IO; end A_Database; : : declare Handle : generic_IO.File_Type; A_Header : File_Header; A_Row : Row; begin generic_IO.Open(File => Handle, Name => "Test"); Header_IO.Write(Handle, A_Header); Row_IO.Write(Handle, A_Row); generic_IO.Close(Handle); end;
Interfaces
which define functions to allow you to convert data types
between the Ada program and the external language routines.
The full set of packages defined for interfaces are show below.
Unlike C/C++ Ada defines a concurrency model as part of the language itself. Some languages (Modula-3) provide a concurrency model through the use of standard library packages, and of course some operating systems provide libraries to provide concurrency. In Ada there are two base components, the task which encapsulates a concurrent process and the protected type which is a data structure which provides guarded access to its data.
fork
function to start a process which is a copy of the
current process and so inherits these global variables. The problem with this
model is that the global variables are now replicated in both processes, a
change to one is not reflected in the other.
In a multi-threaded environment multiple concurrent processes are allowed
within the same address space, that is they can share global data. Usually
there are a set of API calls such as StartThread, StopThread
etc which manage these processes.
Note: An Ada program with no tasks is really an Ada process with a single running task, the default code.
task X is end X; task body X is begin loop -- processing. end loop; end X;As with packages a task comes in two blocks, the specification and the body. Both of these are shown above, the task specification simply declares the name of the task and nothing more. The body of the task shows that it is a loop processing something. In many cases a task is simply a straight through block of code which is executed in parallel, or it may be, as in this case, modelled as a service loop.
task type X is end X; Item : X; Items : array (0 .. 9) of X;Note: however that tasks are declared as constants, you cannot assign to them and you cannot test for equality.
The Ada tasking model defines methods for inter-task cooperation and much more in a system independant way using constructs known as Rendezvous.
A Rendezvouz is just what it sounds like, a meeting place where two tasks arrange to meet up, if one task reaches it first then it waits for the other to arrive. And in fact a queue is formed for each rendezvous of all tasks waiting (in FIFO order).
in out
parameters). It can take any number of
parameters, but rather that the keyword procedure
the
keyword entry
is used. In the task body however the
keyword accept
is used, and instead of the procedure
syntax of is begin
simply do
is used. The
reason for this is that rendezvous in a task are simply sections of the
code in it, they are not seperate elements as procedures are.
Consider the example below, a system of some sort has a cache of elements,
it requests an element from the cache, if it is not in the cache then
the cache itself reads an element from the master set. If this process of
reading from the master fills the cache then it must be reordered.
When the process finishes with the item it calls PutBack
which
updates the cache and if required updates the master.
task type Cached_Items is entry Request(Item : out Item_Type); entry PutBack(Item : in Item_Type); end Cached_Items; task body Cached_Items is Log_File : Ada.Text_IO.File_Type; begin -- open the log file. loop accept Request(Item : out Item_Type) do -- satisfy from cache or get new. end Request; -- if had to get new, then quickly -- check cache for overflow. accept PutBack(Item : in Item_Type) do -- replace item in cache. end PutBack; -- if item put back has changed -- then possibly update original. end loop; end Cached_Items; -- the client code begins here: declare Cache : Cached_Items; Item : Item_Type; begin Cache.Request(Item); -- process. Cache.PutBack(Item); end;It is the sequence of processing which is important here, Firstly the client task (remember, even if the client is the main program it is still, logically, a task) creates the cache task which executes its body. The first thing the cache (owner task) does is some procedural code, its initialisation, in this case to open its log file. Next we have an accept statement, this is a rendezvous, and in this case the two parties are the owner task, when it reaches the keyword
accept
and the client task that calls
Cache.Request(Item)
.
If the client task calls Request
before the owner task has reached
the accept
then the client task will wait for the owner task.
However we would not expect the owner task to take very long to open a log file,
so it is more likely that it will reach the accept
first and
wait for a client task.
When both client and owner tasks are at the rendezvous then the owner task executes
the accept
code while the client task waits. When the owner
task reaches the end of the rendezvous both the owner and the client are set off
again on their own way.
Request
twice in a row then you have a deadly embrace,
the owner task cannot get to Request
before executing
PutBack
and the client task cannot execute PutBack
until it has satisfied the second call to Request
.
To get around this problem we use a select
statement which
allows the task to specify a number of entry points which are valid at any time.
task body Cached_Items is Log_File : Ada.Text_IO.File_Type; begin -- open the log file. accept Request(Item : Item_Type) do -- satisfy from cache or get new. end Request; loop select accept PutBack(Item : Item_Type) do -- replace item in cache. end PutBack; -- if item put back has changed -- then possibly update original. or accept Request(Item : Item_Type) do -- satisfy from cache or get new. end Request; -- if had to get new, then quickly -- check cache for overflow. end select; end loop; end Cached_Items;We have done two major things, first we have added the
select
construct which says that during the loop a client may call either of the entry
points. The second point is that we moved a copy of the entry point into the
initialisation section of the task so that we must call Request
before
anything else. It is worth noting that we can have many entry points with the
same name and they may be the same or may do something different but we only need
one entry
in the task specification.
In effect the addition of the select
statement means that
the owner task now waits on the select
itself until one
of the specified accept
s are called.
Note: possibly more important is the fact that we have not changed the specification for the task at all yet!.
accept
may be valid, so:
task body Cached_Items is Log_File : Ada.Text_IO.File_Type; Number_Requested : Integer := 0; Cache_Size : constant Integer := 50; begin -- open the log file. accept Request(Item : Item_Type) do -- satisfy from cache or get new. end Request; loop select when Number_Requested > 0 => accept PutBack(Item : Item_Type) do -- replace item in cache. end PutBack; -- if item put back has changed -- then possibly update original. or accept Request(Item : Item_Type) do -- satisfy from cache or get new. end Request; -- if had to get new, then quickly -- check cache for overflow. end select; end loop; end Cached_Items;This (possibly erroneous) example adds two internal values, one to keep track of the number of items in the cache, and the size of the cache. If no items have been read into the cache then you cannot logicaly put anything back.
delay
statement into a task, this
statement has two modes, delay for a given amount of time, or delay until a
given time. So:
delay 5.0; -- delay for 5 seconds delay Ada.Calendar.Clock; -- delay until it is ... delay until A_Time; -- Ada-95 equivalent of aboveThe first line is simple, delay the task for a given number, or fraction of, seconds. This mode takes a parameter of type
Duration
specified
in the package System
. The next two both wait until a time is
reached, the secodn line also takes a Duration
, the third line
takes a parameter of type Time
from package Ada.Calendar
.
It is more interesting to note the effect of one of these when used in a select
statement. For example, if an accept
is likely to take a
long time you might use:
select accept An_Entry do end An_Entry; or delay 5.0; Put("An_Entry: timeout"); end select;This runs the
delay
and the accept
concurrently and if the delay
completes before the
accept
then the accept
is aborted
and the task continues at the statement after the delay
,
in this case the error message.
It is possible to protect procedural code in the same way, so we might amend our example by:
task body Cached_Items is Log_File : Ada.Text_IO.File_Type; Number_Requested : Integer := 0; Cache_Size : constant Integer := 50; begin -- open the log file. accept Request(Item : Item_Type) do -- satisfy from cache or get new. end Request; loop select when Number_Requested > 0 => accept PutBack(Item : Item_Type) do -- replace item in cache. end PutBack; select -- if item put back has changed -- then possibly update original. or delay 2.0; -- abort the cache update code end select; or accept Request(Item : Item_Type) do -- satisfy from cache or get new. end Request; -- if had to get new, then quickly -- check cache for overflow. end select; end loop; end Cached_Items;
The else
clause allows us to execute a non-blocking
select
statement, so we could code a polling task, such
as:
select accept Do_Something do end DO_Something; else -- do something else. end select;So that if no one has called the entry points specified we continue rather than waiting for a client.
terminate
which
executes a nice orderly cleanup of the task. (We can also kill a task in a more
immediate way using the abort
command, this is NOT
recommended).
The terminate
alternative is used for a task to specify
that the run time environment can terminate the task if all its actions are
complete and no clients are waiting.
loop select accept Do_Something do end Do_Something; or terminate; end select; end loop;The
abort
command is used by a client to terminate a task,
possibly if it is not behaving correctly. The command takes a task identifer
as an argument, so using our example above we might say:
if Task_In_Error(Cache) then abort Cache; end if;The
then abort
clause is very similar to the
delay
example above, the code between then abort
and end select
is aborted if the delay
clause finishes first.
select delay 5.0; Put("An_Entry: timeout"); then abort accept An_Entry do end An_Entry; end select;
protected type Cached_Items is function Request return Item_Type; procedure PutBack(Item : in Item_Type); private Log_File : Ada.Text_IO.File_Type; Number_Requested : Integer := 0; Cache_Size : constant Integer := 50; end Cached_Items; protected body Cached_Items is function Request return Item_Type is begin -- initialise, if required -- satisfy from cache or get new. -- if had to get new, then quickly -- check cache for overflow. end Request; procedure PutBack(Item : in Item_Type) is begin -- initialise, if required -- replace item in cache. -- if item put back has changed -- then possibly update original. end Request; end Cached_Items;This is an implementation of our cache from the task discussion above. Note now that the names
Request
and PutBack
are now
simply calls like any other. This does show some of the differences between
tasks and protected types, for example the protected type above, because it
is a passive object cannot completly initialise itself, so each procedure
and/or function must check if it has been initialised. Also we must do all
processing within the stated procedures.