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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!69.16.185.112.MISMATCH!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!fx25.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Shark8 <OneWingedShark@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64;
 rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/36.0a1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_GNAT=c2=a0and_Tasklets?=
References: <455d0987-734a-4505-bb39-37bfd1a2cc6b@googlegroups.com>
 <XKOjw.764819$JH1.280080@fx08.iad>
 <f9828477-a98e-4795-803d-5926aa7a1fdb@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <f9828477-a98e-4795-803d-5926aa7a1fdb@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <KCpkw.352348$Mq4.248453@fx25.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@teranews.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 00:56:10 UTC
Organization: TeraNews.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 17:56:05 -0700
X-Received-Bytes: 1723
X-Received-Body-CRC: 4222431203
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24089
Date: 2014-12-17T17:56:05-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 17-Dec-14 06:06, vincent.diemunsch@gmail.com wrote:
> I am sorry to disagree : the very existence of a parallelism Library shows
> the inability of the current Ada technology to do deal directly with parallelism
> inside the Ada langage. I realy think this is due to the weakness of current compilers,
> but if there are also problems inside the langage they should be addressed (like the
> Ravenscar restriction that allowed predictable tasking, or
> special constructs to express parallelism, or "aspects" to indicate that a task
> should be run on a GPU...).

I don't think there's anything keeping, say, NVidia from making an Ada 
compiler that automatically throws tasks/subprograms on the GPU [ala 
CUDA] with use of a implementation-defined aspect/pragma... in fact, 
IIRC, that's *exactly* what pragmas were intended for in the `83 standard,