From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: ATC---The Holy Grail of Ada Tasking?
Date: 1998/07/08
Date: 1998-07-08T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dewar.899945858@merv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 35A2C41D.F22CAE9E@aonix.com
I must say that referring to the ATC abomination as the holy grail of
Ada tasking seems almost sacriligeous. To me this is one of the worst
features of Ada 95. It introduces significant distributed overhead,
and the burden of making your code abort safe (especially when there
is no way, if you are not using pramga Abort_Defer, a special GNAT
pragma) to conveniently make code abort safe, except encapsulating it
in junk protected records, is FAR too heavy. We have had a few people
try to use ATC extensively, but in most cases they gave up (making
code async abort safe is really a VERY difficult discipline). Unless
you are very careful ATC is asking for non-repeatable troubles in
complex programs.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-07-08 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <slrn6p3tph.q9p.franke@paxp01.mipool.uni-jena.de>
1998-07-08 0:00 ` ATC---The Holy Grail of Ada Tasking? Brian Nettleton
1998-07-08 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1998-07-10 0:00 ` Frank Ecke
1998-07-10 0:00 ` Pat Rogers
1998-07-10 0:00 ` Frank Ecke
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox