Re: Status of AdaCL: Ada Class Library

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>]

"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:

> Am 22.02.2010, 02:51 Uhr, schrieb Björn Persson <bjorn@rombobjörn.se>:
>
>> I had intended to switch from Charles to Ada.Containers, but I changed my
>> mind when I learned that Ada.Containers can't even be read by multiple
>  > tasks at once.
>
> For the record, we've studied this several times and have always concluded 
> that hidden synchronization is dangerous. That is, synchronization should be 
> explicit. Beyond that, it is impossible to come up with a reasonable 
> definition of what should be locked -- it really depends on the use of the 
> containers.

I agree with this, but I think the OP was implying that you needed
locking even for read-only access of Ada.Containers from multiple
tasks; is that true? I don't see why it should be; each task declares
its own cursors, which don't interfere with each other.

Of course, there's nothing enforcing the read-only, so this is not
very safe.

-- 
-- Stephe