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, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,fb45e48e8dddeabd X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Robert Dewar Subject: Re: Ada Protected Object Tutorial #1 Date: 1999/12/27 Message-ID: <848rus$s6v$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 565454679 References: <839toq$pu$1@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net> <385AC716.7E65BD5C@averstar.com> <845pgk$qkf$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <846rk7$gba$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <848ajb$o39$1@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x24.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Dec 27 23:21:52 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-12-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <848ajb$o39$1@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>, Richard D Riehle wrote: > Protected objects represent a significant > improvement over semaphores for mutual exclusion but need to > be used sparingly in a multi-tasking design. As your note > implies, a protected object is not a substitute for a task. I find this a type error :-) Protected objects and semaphores are not the same kind of thing. A semaphore is a particular synchronization mechanism with advantages and disadvantages. A protected object is a language mechanism for CREATING synchrnonization mechanisms. Indeed a very standard example of the use of protected types is to implement a standard semaphore. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.