From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 30 Jul 93 17:51:25 GMT
From: seas.gwu.edu!mfeldman@uunet.uu.net  (Michael Feldman)
Subject: Re: Query about monitor (passive) task optimization
Message-ID: <1993Jul30.175125.9559@seas.gwu.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <CAzCvo.34p@ddciiny.UUCP> jls@ddciiny.UUCP (Jonathan Schilling) writ
es:
>
>Several of DDC-I's compiler products now have automatic compiler recognition
>of monitor tasks, meaning there is no pragma, compiler switch, or any other
>user action required -- the compiler (with the runtime system) just does the 
>optimization whenever it recognizes an eligible task.

Congratulations! I mean in no way to diminish this accomplishment, but 
point out that those of us who have been teaching tasking for 10
years, and LIKE the tasking model, have always taught that a good compiler
can, and should, seek out and do these optimizations.

That DDC-I is the first in 10 years to do it is a commentary on IMHO
the monumental risk-averseness and lack of ingenuity in the the Ada compiler
business. This industry has preferred quantity (how many validation
certificates do YOU have?) to quality (how well are we REALLY exploiting
the possibilities of the language). 'Nuff said.
>
>We're in the process of writing a paper describing this approach, and its
>pros and cons relative to the pragma approach, and we'd like to include 
>references to any related work in this area.  So my query is, does anyone
>know of any other Ada compilers that use the automatic recognition approach?
>
Not that I've ever heard of. Let me know if you find one, please?

Oh - I suppose the universities might have helped industry do some of
these things, just like in other areas of computing. Unfortunately we
never got sources to play with. Maybe with GNAT...

Mike Feldman