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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e1c47fd1b76b1c05,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Alex R. Mosteo" <devnull@mailinator.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Task entries and access to subprograms.
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:25:27 +0200
Message-ID: <4253B917.5070800@mailinator.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net XY3h2wMqCaDbhpUozr4nNA0TtT/aIb/WOwuc1iPgolIthZKGk=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10292
Date: 2005-04-06T12:25:27+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hi,

this is a question about the validity of some approach I'm trying. I 
know that task entries can't have access parameters. My gnat gap 1.1.0 
linux behaves like that:

type AInt is access all Integer;
type Code is access procedure;

task type Blah is
    entry One (I : access Integer); -- Illegal and detected.

    entry Two (I : AInt); -- No complaint. Legal?

    entry Three (C : not null access procedure); -- Illegal and detected.
    --  I have the Ada0Y features enabled.

    entry Four (C : Code); -- No complaint.
end Blah;

I want to execute some arbitrary code inside a task. This is because 
GtkAda in win32 requires all Gtk calls to be made from the same thread, 
and I want to have code outside of that thread able to make Gtk calls 
(for abstraction and future extension purposes I don't want to hardcode 
all my Gtk calls in that task).

Apparently the fourth approach works under linux, but I'm worried it may 
be a bad trick. If this isn't legal I could use a tagged type with a 
defined  Execute method, so I'd pass instances of derived types of this 
base class to the task, and execute the dispatching call.

I'm interested in your oppinion about the second and fourth entries 
above, and in other alternatives to the tagged type workaround.

Thanks!