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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.36.111.213 with SMTP id x204mr6625121itb.27.1498906079609;
        Sat, 01 Jul 2017 03:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.36.92.21 with SMTP id q21mr517547itb.6.1498906079510; Sat,
 01 Jul 2017 03:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!v202no401956itb.0!news-out.google.com!k7ni5203itk.0!nntp.google.com!v202no401955itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2017 03:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <oj7hos$4p8$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=2a02:c7d:3c35:b000:325a:3aff:fe0f:37a5;
 posting-account=L2-UcQkAAAAfd_BqbeNHs3XeM0jTXloS
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a02:c7d:3c35:b000:325a:3aff:fe0f:37a5
References: <oj7hos$4p8$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <6c484b20-6225-4fd0-b21a-5cf9f0651c17@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: cobegin ... coend
From: Lucretia <laguest9000@googlemail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2017 10:47:59 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:47250
Date: 2017-07-01T03:47:59-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Saturday, 1 July 2017 08:12:01 UTC+1, G.B.  wrote:
> A chapter about concurrent processes an older book
> introduces the notation
>       *cobegin* S1; S2; ...; Sn *coend*.

Concurrent Pascal?

> The second "process" between *cobegin* and *coend* seemed trickier,
> as the surrounding control structure depends on the process's result,
> i.e., on variable Completed having been set in time. So, the loop
> needs to wait for another rendezvous, for example.
> 
> Are such things planned for Ada 2X's new parallel features?

Yes, parallel blocks and loops.