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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,8e11100f675ea2df X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Received: by 10.180.100.74 with SMTP id ew10mr11135222wib.7.1357203086031; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 00:51:26 -0800 (PST) Path: l12ni279469wiv.1!nntp.google.com!fu-berlin.de!nuzba.szn.dk!pnx.dk!news.stack.nl!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: asynchronous task communication Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 09:50:47 +0100 Organization: cbb software GmbH Message-ID: <4u2fqbijm0ur.1pbknoccr8hqb.dlg@40tude.net> References: <1c2dnd5E6PMDR33NnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@earthlink.com> <50e18094$0$6583$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <7NednS4s2oukfXzNnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@earthlink.com> <7cudnYloBfQDw3_NnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <6bqdndEYjoxeGHnNnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@earthlink.com> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: cDN0fd8KlIeJLyErIrSf0A.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 2013-01-03T09:50:47+01:00 List-Id: On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 16:20:11 -0800, Charles Hixson wrote: > On 01/02/2013 12:35 PM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >> You make node a discriminated record type. Usually when a node is created >> it is already known how many children and/or parents it will have. E.g. > That's not true in this case. The node adds references depending on the > data that it encounters. OK, that does not look like NN. > Even the "base layer", such as it is, isn't > allocated all at once, but only as appropriate stimuli arrive. That looks like a design choice. Why should it be this way? I mean, it is not a RT system, but anyway this kind of allocation policy would inflict heavy latencies at least initially. It may have sense only if you had a huge number of nodes of which only a minor part were actually involved in actual computations. Such loosely coupled systems are not very common. >> By hands. I write docs manually. It is tedious, I admit. Consider it as an >> extra code review step, helps finding inconsistencies and gaps which >> otherwise slip through. > In my experience, code that's documented that way tends to have > documentation that's incomplete, out of date, or both. That depends. I consider documentation as an integral part of the process. I never release/update anything without documenting it first. Generated documentation is a chaotic collection of comments you once wrote around declarations. If you don't write/update them no tool could fix that. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de