From: Jeffrey Carter <spam@spam.com>
Subject: Re: Penalty of calling a protected operation or task-entry.
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:00:08 GMT
Date: 2003-09-26T18:00:08+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <I8%cb.4197$RW4.1283@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <KYNcb.582809$o%2.265262@sccrnsc02>
Steve wrote:
> Make the read operations use protected functions, they can happen
> concurrently (see: LRM 9.5.1). You will still have some penalty for
> protected procedures since they are mutually exclusive.
The OP referred specifically to GNAT 3.15p. IIRC, all protected
operations obtain a mutex before proceeding in the GNAT implementation,
so GNAT does not use this approach.
--
Jeff Carter
"Death awaits you all, with nasty, big, pointy teeth!"
Monty Python & the Holy Grail
20
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-09-26 18:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-09-26 3:09 Penalty of calling a protected operation or task-entry Frank
2003-09-25 19:30 ` tmoran
2003-09-26 2:59 ` Steve
2003-09-26 18:00 ` Jeffrey Carter [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-09-25 20:17 Beard, Frank Randolph CIV
2003-09-25 19:54 Beard, Frank Randolph CIV
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox