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: 103376,470860aa3e635a7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.mixmin.net!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: GNAT for MS Visual Studio
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-13"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <13duou81kg3sd1c@corp.supernews.com>
 <fcv43c$8sg$1@jacob-sparre.dk> <13f6eg0te46m2a3@corp.supernews.com>
 <fd1so0$lmu$1@jacob-sparre.dk> <QISdna5WdIMntGjbnZ2dnUVZ_rCtnZ2d@comcast.com>
 <rkr7df.7mp.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
 <soednbei8rlx-mXbnZ2dnUVZ_rignZ2d@comcast.com>
 <xwir5zj8j2.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <wvbrabr9hq0t.fsf@astra06.norway.sun.com>
 <ePWdnf5PGZFiwmfbnZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@comcast.com>
 <ltfy11y10v.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <TJSdncwgUrlA-2HbnZ2dnUVZ_ramnZ2d@comcast.com>
 <4xsl4zw3bp.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <YcCdnaCp_dEWKmLbnZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com> <fdsf0r$q0t$1@jacob-sparre.dk>
 <1191357491.860178.230380@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
 <4702ADCC.7080209@obry.net>
 <1191439439.120567.172630@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
 <4703F02D.3030207@obry.net>
 <1191682021.844225.236870@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
 <4707A3D0.3070702@obry.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 18:03:05 +0200
Message-ID: <1tq0h0fb74sxe$.2ys0qzmfxcqo.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 06 Oct 2007 18:03:08 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9d659e4c.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=dKjbDQ>8bJ6i6K;>iZ]763McF=Q^Z^V384Fo<]lROoR1^;5]aA^R6>29EY09GFQU]7[6LHn;2LCV>[<mhadbfdU;EiNT][:;\@8;NHXLI=lhG0
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:2327
Date: 2007-10-06T18:03:08+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 17:03:44 +0200, Pascal Obry wrote:

> Matthew Heaney a �crit :

>> No, this is incorrect.  The container keeps track of nested calls
>> (e.g. Query_Element, Iterate) using a count, in order to prevent
>> container misuse (e.g. deleting the element while it's being
>> queried).  So even though the logical view of the container doesn't
>> change, then physical view does change, and so the standard requires
>> that multiple tasks accessing a container must be properly
>> synchronized, even when the access is read-only.
> 
> Outch! Big mistake to require this to me :(

Why? The container type is not protected, thus you cannot expect it
functioning as if it were the latter.

BTW, I guess if placing a container into a protected object and accessing
it from a function of, might be erroneous on a multi-core platform. Here
two permissions collide: a protected object function can share, the
object's container component cannot. The compiler should change the
implementation of either. Would it?

> Maybe something like "Don�t let best be enemy of good" !

It is rather "We didn't want to change the language to much," like by
making protected types tagged, by introducing pure functions, by allowing
in-out function parameters. It was not the best, not even good...

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