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: 103376,956e1c708fea1c33
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ehud Lamm <mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il>
Subject: Re: Looking for implementation idea
Date: 1999/02/11
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.A41.3.96-heb-2.07.990211154307.89084A-100000@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 443211140
References: <m2yamagkdi.fsf@wf-rch.cirr.com>
 <F6suus.n1x.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com> <79n2dt$5n9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <36BF1604.771D16C7@averstar.com> <79oiek$dqc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Organization: The hebrew University of Jerusalem
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-02-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 9 Feb 1999 robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> In my view, FAR too much emphasis was placed on efficient
> implementation on bare board monoprocessors, at the expense
> of generalizing the capabilities and extending the
> abstraction. The restrictions on protected types cannot be
> justified from an abstraction point of view, they are
> pretty much efficiency dictated (I nearly wrote kludges :-)

can you be a little more specific about what you would have done
differently?


Ehud Lamm     mslamm@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il