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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,6d10b4841e4a643b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-14 03:57:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-038-086.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A.Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Are rendezvous dead? Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:55:31 +0200 Message-ID: References: <3CB940F7.4EC50CFD@yahoo.com> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-038-086.arcor-ip.net (145.254.38.86) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1018781848 1918613 145.254.38.86 (16 [77047]) User-Agent: KNode/0.4 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22508 Date: 2002-04-14T12:55:31+02:00 List-Id: Anatoly Chernyshev wrote: > Hello, everybody, > > I remember, a long time ago I did read a paper entitled like "Rendezvous > are dead. Long live protected object" where it was stated that protected > types are much more convenient for communication between tasks than > rendezvous. And also the rationale dwells mostly upon these types, not > rendezvous. Rendezvous and protected objects are orthogonal views on synchronization: procedural and OO-ish, if you want. None can supersede another. > The question is: are there any practical instances (in Ada 95) when use > of rendezvous is more advantageous than of protected types? In other > words, is it worhty of trying to write the code using only protected > types and completely ignoring rendezvous as possible solution (like the > GOTO operator)? If you try to do it for a system of a real size and complexity, you will probably end with a kind of obscure emulation of rendezvous using protected objects. Issues to consider are: blocking, parameter passing at synchronization points, extensibility, layered protocols. -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de