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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a046ce7f5ee1fa51 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-12-04 02:11:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!teaser.fr!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: "Grein, Christoph" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: new_line in a put_line Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:03:38 +0100 (MET) Organization: ENST, France Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1038996662 8716 137.194.161.2 (4 Dec 2002 10:11:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:11:02 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: X-Authentication-Warning: mail.eurocopter.com: uucp set sender to using -f Content-MD5: hU7ENt+Z4ntS21bVJirwSQ== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk X-Reply-To: "Grein, Christoph" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:31406 Date: 2002-12-04T11:03:38+01:00 > > procedure Put_Line (Text : String) is > > Get_It : Lock (Write_Mutex'Access); > > begin > > Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line (Text); > > end Put_Line; > > Something inside me rebels at using side-effects from a declaration > like that. I can't really talk; my database library unlocks objects > as they go out of scope, but ... well, I know that code gets executed > in declarations, but I don't necessarily want to be this aware of it. > > On the other hand, it's just a monitor, I shouldn't be so scared :) This is exactly the kind of use limited controlled types are destined for. There is a paragraph in the AARM stating that such a (seemingly unused) object (Get_It) must not be optimized away. For unlimited controlled types, this does not hold, i.e. they may be optimized away.