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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,470860aa3e635a7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT for MS Visual Studio
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 06:39:56 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1191850796.034430.272420@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
References: <ltfy11y10v.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
   <TJSdncwgUrlA-2HbnZ2dnUVZ_ramnZ2d@comcast.com>
   <4xsl4zw3bp.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
   <YcCdnaCp_dEWKmLbnZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com>
   <fdsf0r$q0t$1@jacob-sparre.dk>
   <1191357491.860178.230380@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
   <4702ADCC.7080209@obry.net>
   <1191439439.120567.172630@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
   <4703F02D.3030207@obry.net>
   <1191682021.844225.236870@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
   <4707A3D0.3070702@obry.net>
   <1tq0h0fb74sxe$.2ys0qzmfxcqo.dlg@40tude.net>
   <4707C0CC.1000108@obry.net>
   <1aa677sd3f3ox.k8awuo7pj13r.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1191702767.598768.210960@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
   <1aqbpv0czr253.wrmcd70o5se5$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1191792620.535744.132500@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
   <liz4nefx8mhu$.qpy964l7mn99$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1191839564.304635.30030@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.138.37.241
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1191850796 29221 127.0.0.1 (8 Oct 2007 13:39:56
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 13:39:56 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1191839564.304635.30030@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.8.0.12) Gecko/20070724 Red Hat/1.5.0.12-0.3.slc3
 Firefox/1.5.0.12,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: 19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.138.37.241;
   posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:2351
Date: 2007-10-08T06:39:56-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 8 Pa , 12:32, Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homep...@gmail.com> wrote:


> Consider a container inside the protected object. The container
> presumably has access variables to actual contained objects (to
> elements) - some containers just cannot be implemented any other way.
> If the target objects are considered to be OUTside of the protected
> object and thus unprotected, then I'm looking forward to see an
> explanation how the synchronized manipulation of these contained
> objects is supposed to work.

Problem solved. The "missing part" is actually on the same page in
AARM, just few paragraphs later:

http://www.adaic.org/standards/05aarm/html/AA-9-10.html

14, 14.a, 14.b.

The latter is particularly significant, meaning that my example with
protected object used for protecting global variable is compliant.

It's not signalling which is important, but sequential execution and
signalling is not the only way to enforce sequential execution.

Still, 9.b and 14.b don't seem to be consistent with each other.

--
Maciej Sobczak * www.msobczak.com * www.inspirel.com