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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,da61fc2237bf773d
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: tmoran@acm.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Unifying task & Distributed Annex
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:16:53 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <h18ujl$smj$1@aioe.org>
References: 
 <d833adf3-1520-4458-a24e-704117bc00ae@m19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jsj6/wjO/cHSAHkcGxcp1Q.user.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.7.9
X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader
Cancel-Lock: sha1:F7WpPe2X1KAO7wyBArtzKUMyiNE=
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6494
Date: 2009-06-16T20:16:53+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> I think unifying Tasks & the Distributed Annex would be great.

They are different things.  You could write a normal program and easily
change it to a distributed program without ever using the pragma
Asynchronous.  That would let different CPUs, with different disks
containing different data files, run different parts of your
single-tasking program.  Thus a database read-only server partition
would likely not have any asynchronous procedures.  Using asynchronous
procedures in a distributed system is a low-level approach to
multi-tasking, foregoing all the help of Ada "task" handling.
For instance, the effect of
  select
    Operator_Call("Put out the fire");
  or
    delay 60.0;
    Call_Fire_Brigade;
  end select;
would need to be explicitly programmed if Operator_Call was an
asynchronous procedure in a remote partition, instead of an entry
in a task.