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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ec4a7355f321a22b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
Path: 
 controlnews3.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshosting.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 14:42:02 -0500
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <40ACC50E.9040406@mail.usyd.edu.au>
 <mailman.1.1085073466.401.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <c8itt3$gkq$1@titan.btinternet.com> <40adcdfe_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net>
 <c8kti8$p07$1@titan.btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Task discriminants
Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 14:42:06 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
Message-ID: <YIadnaE4uYUXxjPd4p2dnA@megapath.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38
X-Trace: 
 sv3-KwULECbi74/vfQ3k5j4Wivzl8UQyDIAdX6Vcyev5QvzhHFrzIeYebZM6k5otaovcwmkV4qEbWD4kfQK!cpOW/buxo2VCSKtGJ1KfyCdySOqGHABDqBUeYMD+5yzoOOQVF8IZgtqyKGfx4kYr7P1xV2ISWjM1
X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: controlnews3.google.com comp.lang.ada:753
Date: 2004-05-21T14:42:06-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c8kti8$p07$1@titan.btinternet.com...
> "Phil Slater" <phil.slater@amsjv.com> wrote in message
> news:40adcdfe_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net...
> > This prompts the question, "are tasks on an array elaborated in order
from
> > low-index to high-index? So is Martin's code below guaranteed to make
each
> > task's discriminant the same as its index on the array? I looked in RM95
but
> > couldn't locate order of elaboration of array elements.
> >
> > If so, it's potentially useful for setting up an array of tasks that
passes
> > data up and down the array by each rendezvousing with its neighbours.
> > (Obviously the start value of Id and the index range of the array have
to be
> > consistent.)
> >
> > But if the order of elaboration isn't guaranteed, we're back to the old
> > "roll-call" initialisation rendezvous again.
>
> Difinately one for the language lawyers but _in_the_real_world_ I've yet
to
> come across a compiler that did anything other than the 'sensible' thing.
>
> Randy are there? :-)

The RM says "arbitrary order" for initializing subcomponents of object
declarations (see 3.3.1(20) - this is the "fourth step"). So you can't
depend on it.

OTOH, it's fairly hard to imagine why an implementation would do anything
other than use a loop to do it, which would of course give the right answer.
So practically, it probably would work right.

                            Randy.