Re: Multiple entry tasks

["Marin David Condic" <marin.condic.auntie.spam@pacemicro.com>]

I've never played with Priority_Queuing - not an area I know enough to talk
about. However the name suggests that it might provide the answer for the
original problem. It depends on what you want to do, right? Otherwise, the
cascading selects suggested by you and JPR are probably a cleaner approach
than looking at guard conditions. (It corresponds nicely to the sort of
cascading if's that typically get created to handle non-tasking "priority"
issues & is probably more clear to the reader as to what is being done.)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
news:udCD6.2834$D4.281263@www.newsranger.com...
> In article <9bksmp$ang$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, Marin David Condic says...
> However, I was referring to the "priority" we are trying to encode into
the 3
> entries, not task priority. If we make a development policy that they are
to be
> the same (relatively), then I guess it would work out as you say. But in
that
> case, you might as well use the Priority_Queuing entry queuing policy, and
not
> even have to worry about guards at all.
>