From: "Robert L. Spooner" <RLS@Sor.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: Deallocating Task objects
Date: 1997/02/18
Date: 1997-02-18T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3309C668.7D8E@Sor.psu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 33086C65.F9F@elca-matrix.ch
Mats Weber wrote:
>
> It was absulutely necessary to use this approach five years ago with DEC
> Ada and Verdix Ada because these implementations always kept some memory
> allocated for tasks pointed to by library-level access types. I don't
> know if it's still required, but we continue using that approach because
> it's not much extra work as we have a generic package that we
> instantiate for this purpose, and it automatically gives us some
> information on how many tasks of each type we dynamically allocate.
For Ada 83 some memory had to be kept so that the task attributes such
as
T'terminated could be used. I don't know enough about Ada (95) yet to
know
if it is still necessary.
--
Robert L. Spooner
Registered Professional Engineer
Research Assistant
Guidance and Control Department
Applied Research Laboratory Phone: (814) 863-4120
The Pennsylvania State University FAX: (814) 863-7843
P. O. Box 30
State College, PA 16804-0030 RLS19@psu.edu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1997-02-18 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1997-02-15 0:00 Deallocating Task objects Jonas Nygren
1997-02-15 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-02-17 0:00 ` Mats Weber
1997-02-18 0:00 ` Robert L. Spooner [this message]
1997-02-18 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1997-02-18 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-02-20 0:00 ` Norman H. Cohen
1997-02-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox