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: 103376,2ee7285d371d6c1f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kst@thomsoft.com (Keith Thompson) Subject: Re: GNAT 3.10: Decriminators for tasks ? Date: 1996/07/18 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 169444077 sender: news@thomsoft.com (USENET News Admin @flash) x-nntp-posting-host: pulsar references: <4se5fc$bun@unlisys.unlisys.net> organization: Thomson Software Products, San Diego, CA, USA newsgroups: comp.lang.ada originator: kst@pulsar Date: 1996-07-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: [...] > It is quite clear from the syntax that a discriminant part is not allowed > in the task body. The rationale is NOT an Ada tutorial or primer, and it > contains a number of errors, some of them are just plain errors, others > of them result from late changes in the language. The rationale is good > for a general understanding of what is in Ada 95 and why, but you need > a more complete description to actually write code! In defense of the rationale, I'm pretty sure it does not contain any examples showing a discriminant part on a task body. I think the orginal poster just misread it (we exchanged e-mail). I'm also curious how he got a copy of GNAT 3.10. 8-)} -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@thomsoft.com <*> TeleSoft^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Alsys^H^H^H^H^H Thomson Software Products 10251 Vista Sorrento Parkway, Suite 300, San Diego, CA, USA, 92121-2718 "As the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, the Internet deserves the highest protection from government intrusion." -- ACLU v. Reno