[Info-vax] BASIC and AST routines

[VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG]

In article <snlerq$jrr$1 at dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>On 2021-11-23, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG <VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
>> In article <snjcd1$9hn$2 at dont-email.me>, Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>>
>>>That VMS API passes in a stack pointer, a PC and what were originally
>>>two architecture-specific registers.
>>
>> That doesn't answer your aspersions WRT Macro-32.  Try, do try again.
>> I'll be waiting. Also, please tell me about this stack pointer you've
>> now claimed to be passed along too.
>>
>
>You are correct Brian. I wrongly thought it was the SP for some reason
>instead of the PS/PSL. However, passing an architecture-specific PS/PSL
>register to the AST is even more ridiculous than passing the SP.
>
>>
>>
>>>That kind of information simply would not be exposed at application
>>>code level in a modern version of that API as it would (rightly) be
>>>treated as an implementation specific detail that would be handled
>>>by the compiler.
>>
>> Oh, please explain then how are ASTs handled in *ix?  <LOL>
>>
>
>Here is one example of how asynchronous callbacks are handled in Linux:
>
>https://linux.die.net/man/3/dlm_lock
>
>For a proper hardware-level callback when code is written in C, looking
>at microcontroller interrupt handlers would be a good example.
>
>In that world, you can either tag the interrupt handler with an __ISR
>attribute and let the compiler generate the correct code for you, or
>the underlying OS environment can wrap calls to the C language interrupt
>handler with an assembly language handler that is utterly invisible to
>the C language interrupt handler itself.
>
>Here is how one compiler for the PIC32MX (a MIPS MCU) handles this:
>
>https://microchipdeveloper.com/32bit:mx-arch-exceptions-usage
>
>>
>>
>>>That information is only needed because the lowest supported application
>>>language on VMS is Macro-32 and not C (or another comparable low-level
>>>language).
>>
>> You're slinging your BULLSHIT yet again.  Macro-32 has no inherent need
>> or want to know R0, R1, the PC at AST delivery or the PS/PSL.  As I have
>> requested previously, if you want to be slinging manure in here, please
>> show us your shovel.
>>
>
>Fine. So why are these architecture-specific registers passed to what
>is essentially a callback function in a normal application program
>and why do those registers need to be visible from that same callback
>function ?

Stop there!  You stated crap, pure unadulterated crap!  Answer the initial
question!  You're trying to drag this off the main street and down a side 
alley where it'll be lost amongst the riff-raff.

-- 
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.