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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Status of AdaCL: Ada Class Library
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:48:18 -0600
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen
Message-ID: <hm4ds3$62k$1@munin.nbi.dk>
References: 
 <05a58751-7a13-48d6-9080-91322817bfe8@t32g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
 <7ue685FpluU1@mid.individual.net> <op.u8ndnytuz25lew@macpro.krischik.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net
X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1267055299 6228 69.95.181.76 (24 Feb 2010 23:48:19 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:48:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!feed.ac-versailles.fr!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9310
Date: 2010-02-24T17:48:18-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Am 22.02.2010, 02:51 Uhr, schrieb Bj�rn Persson <bjorn@rombobj�rn.se>:

> I had intended to switch from Charles to Ada.Containers, but I changed my
> mind when I learned that Ada.Containers can't even be read by multiple
 > tasks at once.

For the record, we've studied this several times and have always concluded 
that hidden synchronization is dangerous. That is, synchronization should be 
explicit. Beyond that, it is impossible to come up with a reasonable 
definition of what should be locked -- it really depends on the use of the 
containers.

In the case of the containers, task safety of iterators and similar features 
is something that defies a reasonable definition. The problem gets worse if 
you include features used together (such as using First and Next to create a 
loop of some sort). We'd probably need to make the locks visible in order 
for them to be useful.

It's easy to wrap container operations in a protected object, and that is 
always allowed (such operations are not potentially blocking). That allows 
tailoring the locking for the actual usage, and even hiding the actual 
container to prevent abuse.

                                 Randy.