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 10.66.162.137 with SMTP id ya9mr42712010pab.47.1426199942486;
        Thu, 12 Mar 2015 15:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.104.174 with SMTP id a43mr731763qgf.2.1426199942434;
 Thu, 12 Mar 2015 15:39:02 -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!news.glorb.com!hl2no10870904igb.0!news-out.google.com!db6ni50316igc.0!nntp.google.com!hl2no10870897igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 15:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <871tktuc9i.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=2a02:120b:2c20:9060:191c:1bbc:ced5:aa89;
 posting-account=gRqrnQkAAAAC_02ynnhqGk1VRQlve6ZG
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a02:120b:2c20:9060:191c:1bbc:ced5:aa89
References: 
 <8b4d1170-22e6-40d3-8ed1-096dc0163491@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
 <ho90bg.gnt.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
 <71b51c8e-6bed-4156-9f52-31bef57b8575@googlegroups.com>
 <871tktuc9i.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bf5e1244-c5cb-475b-8555-de190aae4ae8@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Structure of the multitasking server
From: gautier_niouzes@hotmail.com
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 22:39:02 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:25155
Date: 2015-03-12T15:39:02-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le jeudi 12 mars 2015 22:38:50 UTC+1, Jacob Sparre Andersen a =E9crit=A0:

> This looks like a busy-wait to me.  Is it?  If not, why not?

Seems so. Is it bad? Well it may eat one core or CPU's performance.
Is it better with a small delay (see below) to cool down the boss ?
Anyway the system is working fine.
BTW, I had forgotten a Stop entry: when all the work was done, the workers =
were still waiting for more :-).

  procedure Process_parallel is
    workers: array(1..8) of Worker_type;
  begin
    All_drivers_numbers:
    for d in is_driver'Range loop =20
      Looking_for_idle:
      loop
        for w in workers'range loop
          select
            workers(w).Run(d, w);
            exit Looking_for_idle;
          else
            null; -- workers(w) is busy
          end select;
        end loop;
        delay 0.01;
      end loop Looking_for_idle;
    end loop All_drivers_numbers;
    for w in workers'range loop
      workers(w).Stop(w);
    end loop;   =20
  end Process_parallel;
_________________________=20
Gautier's Ada programming=20
http://www.openhub.net/accounts/gautier_bd