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: 103376,16594902ce57591b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!proxad.net!proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 11:11:01 +0100 From: Georg Bauhaus Organization: elsewhere User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Macintosh/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Multitasking and containers References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <4566c412$0$5720$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Nov 2006 11:06:10 CET NNTP-Posting-Host: f33f075d.newsspool3.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=3gYYHd]C=^[@>[RYkFXOIPMcF=Q^Z^V3X4Fo<]lROoRQgUcjd<3m<;R>?md>odjVIRPCY\c7>ejVX5WPU;Fgl\d^i1JeHJbD\7U X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7679 Date: 2006-11-24T11:06:10+01:00 List-Id: Maciej Sobczak wrote: > But reading from the protected object is not mutually exclusive (many > readers are allowed) - so where's the gain? What's the difference > between concurrent reads of, say, a Vector via protected object vs. > direct access? Supposing that some operations perform a write on the container, for example while filling or updating, then if there is any potential overlap of a read and a write, the gain of protection is that none of the writes can ever interfere with one of the read operations. If there is no write after some point, I would say that "normal means of protection" includes "no protection is necessary after this point". -- Georg