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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,6f24e26ea2e03c4 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!news.weisnix.org!newsfeed.ision.net!newsfeed2.easynews.net!ision!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Subject: Re: Ada parallelism Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de Organization: cbb software GmbH References: <21e6697e-fd7c-4c5e-93dc-8d894449b5e6@f8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> <4ba9e189$0$6886$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <1id5xnuz0x892$.1odbic5ppiv07.dlg@40tude.net> <4baa27f2$0$6770$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <4baa5987$0$6762$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <109zj9fwa9gxm.1on0bs4bmjkhs.dlg@40tude.net> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:09:27 +0100 Message-ID: <15hueuy4my86h.5s8tbslafhl2.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Mar 2010 15:09:43 CET NNTP-Posting-Host: 0e0bd639.newsspool1.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=dhW4Sm1GRklj5k5aEF7ISmic==]BZ:afn4Fo<]lROoRa<`=YMgDjhgbd2OU1aaAFVd[6LHn;2LCVnb_MXahC5e9o\Nme5NPW_kfHNVDddD8Xgk X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9765 Date: 2010-03-25T15:09:43+01:00 List-Id: On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:44:11 -0400, Robert A Duff wrote: > "Dmitry A. Kazakov" writes: > >> I believe that Ada's tasks on massively parallel processors could really >> shine if compiler supported. Especially because Ada's parameter passing >> model is so flexible to support both memory sharing and marshaling. Well, >> there is a problem with tagged types which are by-reference, this must be >> fixed (e.g. by providing "tagged" types without tags, and thus copyable). > > Tagged types are passed by copy when doing a remote procedure call. > By "by copy" I mean marshalling/unmarshalling, which of course > involves copying the data. Or did you mean something else? Yes, this is what I meant. An entry call to a task running on another processor (with no shared memory) should marshal. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de