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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,52fd60a337c05842 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-16 21:06:24 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!cyclone.socal.rr.com!cyclone3.kc.rr.com!news3.kc.rr.com!twister.socal.rr.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3D0D605B.F86B0670@san.rr.com> From: Darren New X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ada paper critic References: <8avjgu8bnkifee01ffu5i4h247n3khl7ub@4ax.com> <3D0A075F.482703FE@san.rr.com> <3D0CA980.5050505@worldnet.att.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 04:06:23 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.75.151.160 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com X-Trace: twister.socal.rr.com 1024286783 66.75.151.160 (Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:06:23 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:06:23 PDT Organization: RoadRunner - West Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26114 Date: 2002-06-17T04:06:23+00:00 List-Id: Jim Rogers wrote: > The first problem is that Java does not have protected objects in the > Ada sense of the term. Java only provides synchronization blocks, which > are not even close to being protected objects. If every routine of a class is declared synchronized, I think you get something close to protected objects as long as you're not doing real-time, not worried about priority inversion, and etc. All of which Ada gets right, of course. Which you amply demonstrate in your post. > Java's threading model works very well as long as your threads do not > communicate with each other, Basically, you have to build your own entry queues in Java's threads, just like you had to build your own protected objects in Ada 83. > and they never need to be terminated. I'm pretty sure you can force a Java thread to throw an error, thereby terminating. Anyway, I was commenting not on the fact that Java is better or worse than Ada in terms of tasking. Clearly Ada wins hands down over any other GP language. All I was addressing was > >> like non-OO task > >> and protected object types, can be excused by the fact that other > >> languages have no such types at all. and wondering why the poster felt that Java didn't have tasks or protected types. I didn't literally mean "what's wrong with Java's threads", but rather "why do you feel they're so broken that you don't even call them threads?" > problem is that the stop() method does not release any synchronization > locks currently held by the thread being stopped. This easily Ah. I was unaware that it was unsafe. -- Darren New San Diego, CA, USA (PST). Cryptokeys on demand. ** http://home.san.rr.com/dnew/DNResume.html ** ** http://images.fbrtech.com/dnew/ ** My brain needs a "back" button so I can remember where I left my coffee mug.