Re: Generic Instances Scope control ???

[Ray Blaak <blaak@infomatch.com>]

"Vladimir Olensky" <vladimir_olensky@yahoo.com> writes:
>    Though what you suggest  simplifies the initial problem
> ( reducing the number of visible details to only one)  but it
> does not solve the essence of the problem.  Client still
> need to make one generic package instance per each
> declared controller object.
> 
> The point is to hide all that completely from the client.

Your real problem is the need to associate the controller object with the
specific API call. Having a different routine for each object is not really
what is desired, since one needs to associate the specific controller with a
specific routine (which is why you were doing the generic instantiations).

Most languages, however, cannot do this, so most (all?) asynchronous
environments provide some sort of handle/context mechanism so that you can
associate completions with their initial invocations.  Otherwise one cannot
know which completions match to which calls.

The OS interface really needs to allow you to give the controller (or a
pointer to it) as part of the call, so that it can be used as data during the
callback. 

Once you have this, then Controller_Type does not even need to inherit from
Limited_Controlled at all, or even a tagged type, but can be a simple record.

-- 
Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
                                               The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
blaak@infomatch.com                            The Rhythm has my soul.