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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,11f4880dfa9887f7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-02 03:15:38 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: asynchronos select question
Date: 2 Nov 2001 03:15:37 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0111020315.18dc0564@posting.google.com>
References: <9r8nmb$l2j$1@e3k.asi.ansaldo.it>
 <ig1C7.2344$R43.409545@newsb.telia.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1004699738 1456 127.0.0.1 (2 Nov 2001 11:15:38
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Nov 2001 11:15:38 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15630
Date: 2001-11-02T11:15:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Peter Hend?" <phenden@tdab.com> wrote in message news:<ig1C7.2344$R43.409545@newsb.telia.net>...
> Just a question to those who might know. Is this behaviour conforming
> to the standard? I can see no reason in the ARM for not being able
> to abort a blocking io operation. Does it work on other platforms?



See RM 1.1.3(6) second part