Re: Barrier re-evaluation issue with GNAT 4.3.2

[Reto Buerki <reet@codelabs.ch>]

Reto Buerki wrote:
> John B. Matthews wrote:
>> I am troubled by the "potentially blocking operation" warning. Two 
>> things make me think it may be irrelevant: 1) Signal does not actually 
>> block, except to dequeue waiters, and 2) Wakeup, which enters Signal, is 
>> itself a protected procedure:
>>
>> <http://www.adaic.com/standards/05rm/html/RM-D-15.html>
>>
>> I'd welcome critical thoughts.
> 
> We are not getting such a warning with our code, but we are not using
> "requeue" since our scenario is different.

Update: we just noticed that the warning actually *does* show up but we
missed it in the previous build.

I also think the warning is irrelevant. It seems that the compiler is
not smart enough to figure out that the Signal() entry is always open.