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=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.107.70.21 with SMTP id t21mr12629653ioa.134.1520301049758;
        Mon, 05 Mar 2018 17:50:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.0.5 with SMTP id 5mr890460ota.0.1520301049506; Mon, 05
 Mar 2018 17:50:49 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!w142no1571809ita.0!news-out.google.com!a2ni3880ite.0!nntp.google.com!e10no1577893itf.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 17:50:49 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <90838aa0-bd51-4913-b0cf-1ded5024c151@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.240.217.2;
 posting-account=rhqvKAoAAABpikMmPHJSZh4400BboHwT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.240.217.2
References: <90838aa0-bd51-4913-b0cf-1ded5024c151@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <652df156-cec8-4417-ac0c-bed50c163a86@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: multiple delay alternative
From: Mehdi Saada <00120260a@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:50:49 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2202
X-Received-Body-CRC: 993878106
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50828
Date: 2018-03-05T17:50:49-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

So it really was confusing after all. It forced me to deep and read hours l=
ong everything about multitasking I could. Down to the intriquacies of "req=
ueue", which is a really nice feature by the way. I can't say I didn't like=
 it... many times I thought of things before actually reading them, and it'=
s actually quite rewarding intellectually, when you can do that.
I've come with some questions and requests for confirmation as well, that I=
'll post tomorrow. Thanks for this point in particular. Was the guy who wro=
te this confused himself or what ? He hasn't been lacking in teaching skill=
s at all so far.

Before that, one thing I can't get, even after asking other people:
for protected objects, in a protected procedure, when it's blocked, because=
 a reading (protected function) or an entry is being served, are the calls =
to the procedure put on a queue as with entries ?
Someone said me the advantage of protected procedures was that you don't ha=
ve to wait, but I read also they were exclusive with each others... damn.