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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c3c4ae45442f569e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!proxad.net!195.70.164.134.MISMATCH!news.tdcnorge.no!uninett.no!news.eunet.no!kda-news.kongsberg.com!not-for-mail
From: "Egil H. H�vik" <egil.harald.hoevikNOSPAM@REMOVEkongsberg.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada.Text_IO and protected objects (Was: [newbie question] tasks
 and protected types)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:26:06 +0200
Organization: News Kongsberg Defence&Aerospace T-Nett
Message-ID: <d4tftf$m7i$1@kda-news.kongsberg.com>
References: <1114747457.868019.93210@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
 <m23bt9dik6.fsf@hugin.crs4.it> <42720DCD.6030304@mailinator.com>
 <m2y8b1bzdt.fsf@hugin.crs4.it> <4272260d$0$30463$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be>
 <m2acnhn43i.fsf_-_@hugin.crs4.it>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kda-mfxp-16.kda.kongsberg.com
X-Trace: kda-news.kongsberg.com 1114784495 22770 193.71.174.116 (29 Apr 2005
 14:21:35 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: tommy.fallsen@kongsberg.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 14:21:35 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10822
Date: 2005-04-29T16:26:06+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Jacob Sparre Andersen" <sparre@nbi.dk> wrote in message
news:m2acnhn43i.fsf_-_@hugin.crs4.it...
> Adrien Plisson wrote:
> > Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
>
> > > If calls to Ada.Text_IO _are_ potentially blocking operations,
> > > that means that one has to move the calls to a task.
> >

RM 9.5.1(18):
Certain language-defined subprograms are potentially blocking. In
particular, the subprograms of the language-defined input-output
packages that manipulate files (implicitly or explicitly) are potentially
blocking.


>
> I thought entries of protected objects also were "protected actions".
> Unfortunately RM 9.5.1 isn't so clear on that question, that I am sure
> if that is actually the case or not.
>

RM 9.5.3(8):
... For a call on an entry of a protected object, a new protected action
is started on the object (see 9.5.1).


~egilhh