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: 103376,75fea881fcdefe0,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jerry@jvdsys.nextjk.stuyts.nl (Jerry van Dijk) Subject: A Text_IO question I never dared to ask... Date: 1996/07/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 163219259 organization: JerryWare HQ, Haarlem, Holland newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-07-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: ---------------------------- -- Stupid question ahead! -- ---------------------------- This is something that has been bugging me for some time, but to which I still cannot find a reasonable answer: Why is there no record (or even file) locking in Text_IO ??? Ada was clearly designed be be usable in multi-tasking and even distributed environments. But absolutely needed in such environments is controlling file access. So why is this missing ? Yes, I realize that the implementation of a locking mechanism is platform dependent. But so is tasking. Is it because Text_IO should also work on terminals ? But then why not adding another child package that adds file locking ? For now the only GNAT solution that has a chance for being portable is AFAIK using something like a Posix binding. But that only seems available for GNAT/Linux at the moment. And the standard itself is (expensive) propriety. And why go to a external binding when for most basic stuff the Text_IO package is perfectly usable ? I keep wondering... -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Jerry van Dijk -- e-mail: jerry@jvdsys.nextjk.stuyts.nl -- -- Banking Consultant -- Member Team-Ada -- -- Ordina Finance BV -- Located at Haarlem, The Netherlands --