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: 103376,5f39173193c39af
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a97c18c9ff9b447
X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Objects in Fortran 2000
Date: 1997/03/21
Message-ID: <E7EIAI.45x@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 227300559
References: <01bc280b$32c42d40$dac32299@default>
 <5fmemp$bgo@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> <dewar.857827520@merv>
 <5gs6ub$kb3@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-21T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <5gs6ub$kb3@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov>,
Van Snyder <vsnyder@gyre.jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>BTW, Robert, the Fortran proposal for exception/handler blocks, similar to
>the way Ada does it, foundered on the semantics of the combination of
>exceptions and parallelism.  Has the Ada community some insight/advice to
>offer concerning the semantics of exception blocks in the presence of
>parallelism?

Could you be more specific?  I don't know Fortran 90.  Are you talking
about parallel "for all" sorts of loops?  Anyway, if you have multiple
parallel threads of control raising exceptions, you can wait until they
are all synchronized in some way, and then raise a single exception --
for example, the way Ada deals with exceptions during task activation by
raising Program_Error.  (For normal exceptions raised by tasks, not
during activation, Ada says the exception is ignored.  I think that's a
bad thing.)  In Ada, if an exception is raised during a rendezvous, both
tasks get the exception.

- Bob