From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,be3d89c2ad66a506
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "REH" <spamjunk@stny.rr.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Advice on abort
Date: 7 Nov 2005 09:09:53 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1131383393.903975.180350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1131117934.372137.244900@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <436f6ad8$0$196$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.35.35.35
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1131383399 26066 127.0.0.1 (7 Nov 2005 17:09:59
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 17:09:59 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <436f6ad8$0$196$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=192.35.35.35;
   posting-account=lnUIyw0AAACoRB2fMF2SFTIilm8F10q2
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6268
Date: 2005-11-07T09:09:53-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Poul-Erik Andreasen wrote:
> REH wrote:
> > What are the best options when a task needs to be terminated, but
> > signaling the task may not be possible?  We have tasks that sometimes
> > need to be terminated, but may potentially be blocked on a resource,
> > such as a socket.  Currently we use OS-specific calls to terminate the
> > task, but I've never liked that.  I've been thinking of using the abort
> > statement, but I don't think that's very graceful either.  I also would
> > rather not complicate the code (or force polling behavior) by making
> > the sockets non-blocking.  Any advice?
> >
> One poosibillty is too use asyncronius transfer of control. Somthing
> like this.
>
>
> select
>     call.foo_entry  -- this i is a guarded entry in a protected
> object or 				--	another task
>     -- her can you have anything yuo may need to clean up after the abort
> then abort
>     listen_to_socket  this is the function wich may be blocked
> end select
>
> Thee foo_entry basicly dosen't need to do anything. an you have onother
> procedure or entry to open it.
>
>
> PEA.

I was once advised never to use ATC because it is very slow.  Is this
true?  It was in reference to GNAT.