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: 103376,80ae596d36288e8a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!news.weisnix.org!newsfeed.ision.net!newsfeed2.easynews.net!ision!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Why no socket package in the standard ?
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <op.vvyoslycule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <872169864327910446.796089rmhost.bauhaus-maps.arcor.de@news.arcor.de>
 <9cb23235-8824-43f4-92aa-d2e8d10e7d8c@ct4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <1jue77mrlbkor$.1iuz25va18fvm$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <df294cc9-2e1d-4014-ad7e-8d6a0fdc3a82@28g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>
 <1sg3bjezic084.idxvmhddw1hd$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <fd1d07e2-004b-44e4-aeb1-0143af4152ea@z37g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 14:26:18 +0200
Message-ID: <sirt31ahw17d$.1bwiagjxfmv49.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 May 2011 14:26:18 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: ede19f1b.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=732W@7OYI^WaoembcbF;DQ4IUK<Cl32<Q4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF<OcfhCO[;?E3AjS4WP[[6LHn;2LCV^7enW;^6ZC`T\`mfM[68DCSjTDdi2b4OX\
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19470
Date: 2011-05-25T14:26:18+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 25 May 2011 04:54:20 -0700 (PDT), Maciej Sobczak wrote:

> On 25 Maj, 11:14, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
> 
>>> Still, they (sockets) don't have to be part of the language to be
>>> select-ready. It is enough to make them protected objects with
>>> appropriate entries.
>>
>> 1. We need to be able to cancel connect/accept/send/receive from an AST or
>> timed entry call.
> 
> No problem, use non-blocking I/O as an underlying implementation.

The problem is not the implementation, but the interface. If sockets to be
a part of the language they should use language means for handling
synchronization issues.

>> 2. We should never do any I/O related stuff on the context of a protected
>> action.
> 
> No problem - the protected object need not represent the socket
> directly, it might as well be a proxy only representing its current
> state, in which case no I/O happens in the protected context.

I meant handling the states, doing I/O from a protected action would be
just illegal. But it is also inadmissible to handle read/write completion
from there. Yes you could release some waiting tasks and pass the I/O
buffer to one of them, this is how sockets are dealt with now. Such a
clumsy design does not deserve standardization, IMO.

I think that "task" is a more suitable abstraction for socket.

    task type Connect_Socket is
        entry Connect (...);
        entry Receive (...);
        entry Send (...)
    end Socket;

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