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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ab2ba9c5d12b0f12
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Concurrency in Gnat 3.05?
Date: 1996/07/19
Message-ID: <dewar.837815167@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 168979246
references: <4sjqte$3mu@masala.cc.uh.edu>
 <19960718.082642.172@satcom.whit.org> 	<4smktd$phu@masala.cc.uh.edu>
 <JSA.96Jul19133310@alexandria>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-07-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



Jon said

"The point is that time slicing behavior is system dependent.  For
example, GNAT on Solaris maps tasks to threads and they will behave as
you were expecting (switching context for IO, etc.)"

Yes, in fact the default behavior on Solaris clearly violates the Ada 95
standard in that time slicing does occur. We are investigating the use
of the real time priority levels in Solaris which should make it possible
to correct this incorrect behavior.