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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,534dd301375921ac
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.196.232 with SMTP id ip8mr8866439pbc.6.1339832480763;
        Sat, 16 Jun 2012 00:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 l9ni56521pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is Text_IO.Put_Line() thread-safe?
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 09:41:09 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <ivod9qkrjkit$.tuaul00i9ng4$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <93201f1a-d668-485e-83b4-492bc283f36e@googlegroups.com>
 <wcc395y57gm.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <cfd4cf5d-9fd5-4288-b2b8-304626b8ca16@googlegroups.com>
 <wcc7gv9ycni.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <546fc310-c898-417a-9c92-a5b12ef32591@googlegroups.com>
 <wcc7gv9zia8.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <4fdac8dc$0$9508$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <4smqkt4783bt.7xvwmlmb0lej$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wcc8vfoqn0k.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4RFYTQ6jM/dAKFJoI0fUkg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-06-16T09:41:09+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:32:43 -0400, Robert A Duff wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
>> 1) Transactions would be difficult to do taking
>> into account language problems with MI and MD;
> 
> I don't understand that part.

File I/O was done in an non-OO way. It was OK for Ada 83. File I/O was
expected unsafe, there was only ASCII, life was simpler in 80's (:-)).
Transaction level should be added for safety. I don't want even to imagine
it designed as a bunch of unsorted procedures cut'n'pasted for all possible
combinations of files, items, streams, encodings, I/O modes.

>> 2) I don't consider Text_IO
>> design wrong.
> 
> With respect to task safety, or in general?

Tasking.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de