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,fb45e48e8dddeabd
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Richard D Riehle <laoXhai@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Ada Protected Object Tutorial #1
Date: 1999/12/31
Message-ID: <84j4ed$8cq$1@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 566959659
References: <839toq$pu$1@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>
 <slrn85h77n.68i.kaz@ashi.FootPrints.net> <385AC716.7E65BD5C@averstar.com>
 <slrn85nr62.4ps.kaz@ashi.FootPrints.net> <s5sijcssrg3125@corp.supernews.com>
 <Pine.A41.3.96-heb-2.07.991226141254.25330A-100000@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il>
 <845pgk$qkf$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <slrn86d0ao.fbn.kaz@ashi.FootPrints.net>
 <846rk7$gba$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <848ajb$o39$1@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>
 <848rus$s6v$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
X-Server-Date: 31 Dec 1999 20:41:49 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-12-31T20:41:49+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <848rus$s6v$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
	Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> wrote:

>A semaphore is a particular synchronization mechanism with
>advantages and disadvantages.

Lots of disadvantages.  More than commonly noted.  This is 
especially true when using languages other than Ada or when
using certain embedded R/T OS.   I ran across a very nice
exposition of this issue last week while browsing through
a new book, "An Embedded Systems Primer," my David Simon. 
This, by the way, is a good book for an introductory course
on embedded systems programming, although there is no mention
of Ada.  

>A protected object is a language mechanism for CREATING
>synchrnonization mechanisms.

Agreed.  Is it always the best choice?  Not sure.  When should
one use the semaphores provided by an embedded O/S, or the hardware
semaphores available in some environments?   

>Indeed a very standard example of the use of protected types
>is to implement a standard semaphore.

Yes, this is a common example and it sometimes leads the designer
away from the more robust option of a fully encapsulated set of
values.  

If one is determined to implement a semaphore, a protected object is a
better choice than a task.   However, Burns and Wellings in "Concurrency 
in Ada" note that  full encapsulation is the real value of a protected
resource, and express caution about low-level mechanisms such as
semaphores versus the reliability of a "monitor" mechanism a la the
protected object.   

Richard Riehle