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-Thread: 103376,a555752235c318a9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!proxad.net!213.200.89.82.MISMATCH!tiscali!newsfeed1.ip.tiscali.net!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feeder1.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!skynet.be!skynet.be!newspost001!tjb!not-for-mail Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:41:23 +0100 From: Adrien Plisson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: fr-fr, fr-be, fr, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: i'm going crazy with task References: <1101830171.387036.135810@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <41ad991b$0$25066$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be> <5eorq0lbcd90apmjoe46ob4pj96pchtcno@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <5eorq0lbcd90apmjoe46ob4pj96pchtcno@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <41adf355$0$13460$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be> Organization: -= Belgacom Usenet Service =- NNTP-Posting-Host: 85b18dc8.news.skynet.be X-Trace: 1101919061 news.skynet.be 13460 81.242.46.248:4108 X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@skynet.be Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6693 Date: 2004-12-01T17:41:23+01:00 List-Id: Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > Such should only require some data structure for the event > timing, and the externally created process to be started (path to a > script file, perhaps). But the original question seemed to be assuming > diverse internally coded processes... Okay, I suppose timed one-shots > could still be applied to internal code modules -- and those could be > (very rough description here) handled as a sort of call-back from the > timer to plain procedures. i was only making suppositions on what the OP was trying to do, i don't speak on behalf of him. so, until he posts some more informations, we can't assume anything on what he is trying to do. i only raised the point about the scheduler because the term is confusing. you are right pointing out that a "task scheduler" should not need that much tasks, but you forgot a case which forces the use of tasks. consider that actions of the scheduler are internal procedures. if you implement it with callbacks, the scheduler will block until the actions terminates. if actions are lengthy, you have a problem. the solution is from the scheduler to create a new task which will call the procedure. anyway, even when doing this there is no need for a big array of tasks... -- rien