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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,534dd301375921ac
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.193.129 with SMTP id ho1mr3641831pbc.8.1339707107940;
        Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:51:47 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 l9ni51159pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: awdorrin <awdorrin@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is Text_IO.Put_Line() thread-safe?
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:50:21 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <3fff1269-06f5-47a2-bc10-c2145b3a297d@googlegroups.com>
References: <93201f1a-d668-485e-83b4-492bc283f36e@googlegroups.com>
 <jrdc48$14h2$1@adenine.netfront.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.91.173.42
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1339707107 16701 127.0.0.1 (14 Jun 2012 20:51:47
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 20:51:47 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <jrdc48$14h2$1@adenine.netfront.net>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=192.91.173.42;
 posting-account=YkFdLgoAAADpWnfCBA6ZXMWTz2zHNd0j
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-06-14T13:50:21-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thursday, June 14, 2012 2:56:05 PM UTC-4, Jeffrey Carter wrote:
> This design sounds suspect to me. Everything in Common needs to be protec=
ted if=20
> it's being accessed by multiple tasks.

The design is incredibly bad, in my opinion. This is 25 year old code, orig=
inally written in Ada83 for an AIX RISC system. The original application wa=
s multiple AIX processes. This code was then ported to VxWorks and the proc=
esses were made VxWorks tasks.

Now I've been given the task of porting the application from VxWorks to Lin=
ux. Considering it is nearly 300k SLOC of Ada and C (written for Big Endian=
 RISC/Motorola) the port has been pretty successful so far.

> >
> > Text_IO.Put_Line( Proc_Enum'Image(thisPID)&" waiting for"&
> > Proc_Enum'Image(waitPID));
>=20
> Is this in Common, or in the tasks that use Common?
>=20

The procedure that contains the 'Rendezvous_With_Others' procedure is locat=
ed in the common package, which is then 'With'd into every other thread. Co=
mmon has both Ada and C interfaces to the same functions/procedures. One th=
read is the 'Control' thread, while the others wait for it, but they are al=
l calling the Rendezvous_With_Others procedure, passing in their ID.

It is a mess, and if I could re-design the whole thing, I would. Unfortunat=
ely I'm being told 'make it work' and that since the application has been u=
sed for 25+ years on the other platforms that there isn't anything wrong wi=
th the design.