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: 103376,956e1c708fea1c33 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com Subject: Re: Looking for implementation idea Date: 1999/02/09 Message-ID: <79oiek$dqc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 442177250 References: <79n2dt$5n9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36BF1604.771D16C7@averstar.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x1.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Feb 09 05:52:23 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-02-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <36BF1604.771D16C7@averstar.com>, Tucker Taft wrote: > > They were designed to work in whatever environment > supported the Ada run-time, be it parallel shared-memory, > distributed memory, mono-processor, hypercube, etc. > -Tuck That may be the official position, but I was there during the discussions :-) In my view, FAR too much emphasis was placed on efficient implementation on bare board monoprocessors, at the expense of generalizing the capabilities and extending the abstraction. The restrictions on protected types cannot be justified from an abstraction point of view, they are pretty much efficiency dictated (I nearly wrote kludges :-) -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own