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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1142654921f4156d,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: ericferg@aol.com
Subject: Two-Way Task Communication In Ada (w/o Protected Objects)
Date: 1996/11/25
Message-ID: <19961125215900.QAA23391@ladder01.news.aol.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 200705123
organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-admin: news@aol.com
Date: 1996-11-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In a message dated 96-11-24 20:15:03 EST, blaak@mda.ca writes:

<< Two way communication with peers can be done by using a protected
object. Just
 pretty it up with Send/Receive operations (make a Channel abstraction)
and have
 the tasks work with a channel object to communicate.
  >>

Thanks for the info.  Though I didn't mention it, I was actually trying to
AVOID  intermediate protected objects between the tasks (which would act
as shared "dequeues" or "argument buffers" ... the "Channel abstraction"
you mention).

Would anyone happen to know of any way to position or structure Ada task
declarations such that two tasks will have visibility of each other, and
may _directly_ invoke each other's entries (and thus provide for direct,
two way message & argument passing, without the use of intermediate
argument buffers)?

If so, please post a reply or e-mail me at EricFerg@aol.com

Thanks once again, blaak@mda.ca, for your response!

Eric Ferguson