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,c33f8f65997c21d0
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.180.105.2 with SMTP id gi2mr517131wib.4.1348939270933;
        Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 q11ni98957637wiw.1!nntp.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.141.40.65.MISMATCH!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newspeer1.nac.net!news.mi.ras.ru!goblin3!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Problem with task component
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:17:19 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <m2mx0f7bf4.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <m2ehlx50vk.fsf@pushface.org>
	<1667b8e2qt7ei$.1gg1h3hrp9amz$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<m2a9wl4ugn.fsf@pushface.org>
	<187uk10m6z8xj.yr1cpbgrdur$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<m262794rbn.fsf@pushface.org> <k3or1c$v1i$1@dont-email.me>
	<m2r4pr7rsa.fsf@pushface.org> <k3pnmv$o94$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="5f22ba276a4b4f77c63ae2949e7306f1";
	logging-data="6087"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/QQiYeip8EZDqSCowIRLDoRKuhnw1uRYg="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5mLF8ZK7otj8nSBi9tsvXagIWbI=
	sha1:9+8woNf3HhtbRzZOR0v+6Ezx2RU=
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: 2012-09-24T15:17:19+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"J-P. Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr> writes:

> The principle of the "terminate" is that a task terminates
> automatically if it can be proven that its entries cannot be called.

If that's the case, why do we need to say so?!

I asked earlier whether a select with an accept/terminate body would
behave as I wanted, and wrote this:

   procedure Termination is
      task type T is
         entry Stop;
      end T;
      type R is limited record
         The_T : T;
      end record;
      task body T is
      begin
         loop
            select
               accept Stop;
            or
               terminate;
            end select;
         end loop;
      end T;
      The_R : R;
   begin
      null;
   end Termination;

which does indeed manage to run to completion and return to the command
line.

On thinking about it, I can see that a whole class of toy programs that
demonstrate tasking would have to replace the 'null;' body above with
'delay 1_000_000.0;' if the language worked the way I had hoped.

Until about 10 years ago, my main procedures were exactly like that!