Re: Safety of unprotected concurrent operations on constant objects

[sbelmont700@gmail.com]

On Sunday, May 4, 2014 4:25:26 PM UTC-4, Shark8 wrote:
> 
> What's the problem, then, with making the entire map constant?
> 

The problem is assuming what a subprogram might or might not do at all, let alone how it may or may not do it, and certainly not whether that method would be task safe or not.  What makes you think the Map object has any fields at all to even be constant (instead of being a null record)?  What proof do you have that the Find subprogram even bothers to access the Map argument, let alone any constant elements?  Why do you assume that GNAT doesn't just have one massive static system-wide array that it puts every element of every container into, with some complex search algorithm that makes is appear as though you have separate objects?  Perhaps the Find subprogram sends an email to a minimum-wage secretary at AdaCore that has all your objects filed on 3x5 cards in drawers, and who then looks up your data and emails it back?  All this is going on in the private part, which means you're not allowed to answer about it one way or the other.

-sb