From: "Beard, Frank" <beardf@spawar.navy.mil>
To: "'comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org'" <comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Subject: RE: How can I avoid Using a Semaphore? (long)
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:42:13 -0500
Date: 2001-02-08T18:42:13-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mailman.981675791.8742.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org> (raw)
It wasn't a conclusion, it was a question (hence
the question mark ('?') at the end of the sentence).
It was supposed to mean I was puzzled that I/O was
not potentially blocking. I thought I new it was
potentially blocking, but when I read 9.5.1 I quit
reading at 17 for some reason. I guess because it
started talking about bounded errors. For some
reason, it seemed like the next paragraph started
a new section.
I don't know, my brain was failing me. I was tired.
But thanks for responding. I would have gotten around
to re-reading it eventually, and hopefully I would
have noticed it the next time.
Thanks
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Dewar [mailto:dewar@gnat.com]
> So, according to section 9.5.1, doing I/O during a protected
> operation is NOT potentially blocking?
How do you come to that odd (and wrong) conclusion :-)
next reply other threads:[~2001-02-08 23:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-08 23:42 Beard, Frank [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-02-07 21:55 How can I avoid Using a Semaphore? (long) Beard, Frank
2001-01-13 16:18 DuckE
2001-01-22 16:51 ` mark_lundquist
2001-01-23 6:02 ` DuckE
2001-02-02 22:18 ` Mark Lundquist
2001-02-03 3:01 ` DuckE
2001-02-02 21:38 ` Niklas Holsti
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox