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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,894846be18e92713
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: griest-tom@cs.yale.edu (Tom Griest)
Subject: Re: GNAT R/T Annex and Win95
Date: 1996/04/17
Message-ID: <4l2sliINNl7m@RA.DEPT.CS.YALE.EDU>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 147976225
references: <3174712D.71C7@ee.ubc.ca>
organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-04-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3174712D.71C7@ee.ubc.ca> Greg Bond <bond@ee.ubc.ca> writes:
>My understanding is that Win95 uses a timesliced scheduling policy for 
>threads, and that GNAT tasks are mapped to Win95 threads. 

Win32 threads are scheduled on a priority basis, but time-sliced
within a priority.

Right now GNAT/Win32 uses threads, but it is possible in the future
we will switch to "fibers" which provide even finer control over
scheduling.

-Tom