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,be3d89c2ad66a506
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsgate.cistron.nl!takemy.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Advice on abort
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.14.1
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: <1131117934.372137.244900@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <436f6ad8$0$196$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk>
 <1131383393.903975.180350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <1rb5pcog6iau7$.180ltiuk2q6cv.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4370bc36$0$180$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk>
 <1ozi307fng5fi$.1ms3kyzc7defi$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4370d97d$0$141$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk>
 <u0m8x4ae976b$.1i2o5z7fcbhoh$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <437203c7$0$158$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:14:00 +0100
Message-ID: <1t79xxk57a1mo$.1d6326wooi94y.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 09 Nov 2005 18:13:54 MET
NNTP-Posting-Host: ea277dcc.newsread2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=NHN:n3>KnUZUEj^fn36YV^Q5U85hF6f;TjW\KbG]kaMXQ>n?D9BSA]\=0DeU@Y_YO\[6LHn;2LCV^[<mhadbfdU[K`c\`ZefRL^
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6327
Date: 2005-11-09T18:13:54+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:12:18 +0100, Poul-Erik Andreasen wrote:

> The ACT-feature i made deliberately for dealing with posibbly blocking
> situations,

It meant to deal with blocking operations as those defined by Ada standard.
Socket I/O is not covered by the language it is outside.

> and to avoiding a language-feature, on the basis of 
> potentiel bad implementation, is to mee a wierd way of thinking.

Let me put it so. Among all possible variants, abort and ACT have the
highest probability that something might get wrong. Here I don't mean buggy
compilers, I do legal ones.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de