Re: Barrier re-evaluation issue with GNAT 4.3.2

[Reto Buerki <reet@codelabs.ch>]

Jean-Pierre Rosen wrote:
> Dmitry A. Kazakov a �crit :
>> Timing_Events does not have any advantages over delay or asynchronous
>> transfer of control. I guess it was provided for some low-level stuff like
>> interrupts from hardware timers. However there was already a support for
>> interrupts mapped into protected operations, so it really puzzles me why
>> Timing_Events were added.
>>
> The answer is easy: because users asked for it. Of course, it is
> useless, but some people don't feel easy with tasks, and want to use the
> kind of tools they are accustomed to.
> 
> So rather than painfully answering requests like "why doesn't Ada have
> that feature", it was simpler to say "what's the heck" and provide it.
> If you don't like it (I am also in that case), don't use it.

Could you elaborate the negative aspects of Ada.Real_Time.Timing_Events?

We found using timing events was straightforward and lightweight.