comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thom Brooke <tcb_cut_out_80908@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Design problem using Multiple Dispatch or Redispatch (long)
Date: 2000/03/15
Date: 2000-03-15T00:00:00+00:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <38CEF00C.69218384@yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 0dvz4.1553$U3.65019@news.pacbell.net

tmoran@bix.com wrote:
> 
> Suppose you could have a two dimension dispatch table and dispatch
> on both parameters in
>   Execute(A_Processor, A_Command);
> You said different processors execute different subsets of commands,
> so, since the table couldn't have any holes, you would have to
> have dummy entries - returning an error condition, say.  That
> means that any time you add a new command, you'll have to add it,
> or at least a dummy Execute for it, to each processor, and each
> time you add a processor it will need Execute's for all known
> commands.  Is that OK?

Yes, this would work.  And it's kind of along the line I was heading.

But I'm really trying to avoid any kind of "explicit dispatching"; I'd
like to get the compiler/run-time to do it for me :-)

Of course, if that doesn't work, I'll be back to this.

Thanks.
-- 

-- Thom Brooke
-- Cut out "_CUT_OUT" to get my real email address.




  reply	other threads:[~2000-03-15  0:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-03-14  0:00 Design problem using Multiple Dispatch or Redispatch (long) Thom Brooke
2000-03-14  0:00 ` Simon Wright
2000-03-15  0:00   ` Thom Brooke
2000-03-16  0:00     ` Simon Wright
2000-03-14  0:00 ` Nick Roberts
2000-03-15  0:00   ` Thom Brooke
2000-03-14  0:00 ` tmoran
2000-03-15  0:00   ` Thom Brooke [this message]
2000-03-14  0:00 ` David Kristola
2000-03-15  0:00   ` Thom Brooke
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox