Re: Interresting difference in Normal-Returns/Expression-Functions and Extended-Returns.

[Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com>]

On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 8:20:07 PM UTC-6, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> "Shark8" wrote in message 
> 
> news:e0c67da2-159a-4a37-b199-1d80312f6aca@googlegroups.com...
> ...
> >> Delay
> >> also causes context switching. When you use null statement the main task
> >> likely to manage to create all contestant before any of them gains the
> >> processor (depending on OS settings and number of cores available).
> 
> >I have four cores; that shouldn't be a problem though -- I'm using the 
> >protected
> >object to manage my text-output debugging.
> 
> 
> But doing that is a Bounded_Error (see 9.5.1(8-18), and specifically 
> paragraph 18).

I thought I remembered something about it being questionable/implementation-defined if it would work as expected -- but it did work on the initial experiment (which was actually on tasks w/ discriminants).


> It of course might work as you intend (that's one of the possible results), 

*nod*

> but its something you should avoid in code unless you never, ever expect to 
> run it on a different Ada compiler.

Right.

> To do this correctly, you have to use a lock object, typically wrapped in a 
> controlled object so that initialization does the locking and finalization 
> does the unlocking (that way you don't have to worry about abort or 
> exceptions screwing up your locking). I'll leave the code needed as an 
> exercise for the OP. :-)

I see. I've been putting off getting into finalization... oh, hey, what about tasks as fields of records...

;)