From: Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com>
Subject: Re: Entries in protected private parts
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:32:35 GMT
Date: 2001-04-25T17:32:35+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <TSDF6.5127$QV4.437899@www.newsranger.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 9c6v6h$3tq$1@news.netmar.com
In article <9c6v6h$3tq$1@news.netmar.com>, adam@irvine.com says...
>
>Apologies in advance if this post gets screwed up. This is the first time
>I've attempted to post since Deja.com ended up on the
>AshHeapOfHistory.com.
>
>The language appears to allow entry declarations in the private part of a
>protected type declaration (9.4(4-6)). However, the entry can only be
>referenced from the body of the same protected unit, which means it can be
>called only from a protected operation; and 9.5.1(8,11) says it's an error
>if a protected action makes an entry call. So is there any possible reason
>to declare an entry in a protected type's private part? Was there a
>particular reason why the language allowed this?
"requeue". It's damn handy for that.
---
T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-04-25 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-04-25 16:49 Entries in protected private parts adam
2001-04-25 17:32 ` Ted Dennison [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox