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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.200.43.6 with SMTP id 6mr3207415qtu.9.1464791858853; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 07:37:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.157.10.23 with SMTP id 23mr63148otg.12.1464791858783; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 07:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!p34no1252841qgp.1!news-out.google.com!g40ni288qge.1!nntp.google.com!q32no2271955qgq.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 07:37:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:191:8202:8510:5985:2c17:9409:aa9c; posting-account=fdRd8woAAADTIlxCu9FgvDrUK4wPzvy3 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:191:8202:8510:5985:2c17:9409:aa9c References: <25c43463-47ca-4021-82ee-299e6a075faa@googlegroups.com> <2c0dfaf8-9344-4b9c-87b4-12de687687ce@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Advice, tasking and hardware From: rieachus@comcast.net Injection-Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 14:37:38 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 1831 X-Received-Body-CRC: 3585233892 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:30540 Date: 2016-06-01T07:37:38-07:00 List-Id: On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 12:13:15 AM UTC-4, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote: > > Is there any reason for this to be a task? I've always used a protected o= bject: Shrug. If it ain't broke don't fix it? Seriously I started doing this avo= iding of terminate options back when they were expensive in some implementa= tions, and before protected objects came along. Never rethought it since t= he complex calls were outside the hard real time parts. Hmmm. The other difference is you can't call abort in a protected object. = My way I can abort any hung tasks when shutting down.