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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1d52a75fd633fefc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-21 04:57:42 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!195.54.122.107!newsfeed1.bredband.com!bredband!newsfeed01.se.dataphone.net!nntp.se.dataphone.net!news.powertech.no!nntp.newmedia.no!newsfeed1.enitel.no!news.telia.no!not-for-mail Sender: ohk@gong10.clustra.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada to C++ translator? References: <3A844255.24A4DBA3@lmco.com> <3A866B28.CE67B4A0@yyy.zzz> <3A8C6AA3.3F90043D@lmco.com> <%Wvk6.102$aw5.380@www.newsranger.com> <2HOk6.1999$yw.110959740@newssvr10-int.news.prodigy.com> From: Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen Message-ID: X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:56:10 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.204.160.194 X-Complaints-To: abuse@enitel.no X-Trace: news.telia.no 982760170 195.204.160.194 (Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:56:10 CET) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:56:10 CET Organization: Enitel Internet Public Access Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5392 Date: 2001-02-21T12:56:10+00:00 List-Id: "Ken Garlington" writes: > "Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen" wrote in message > news:umqlmr09ui2.fsf@gong10.clustra.com... > : "Ken Garlington" writes: > : > : Seriously, what is your opinion on today's thread support in Ada? > > Do you mean for a particular compiler/target pair, or tasking at the > language level? As to the former, you'd have to tell me the particular > context before I could give an intelligent answer (which was one of the > points of my previous post :). As to the latter, I don't see anything > inherent in the language that prevents a compiler from doing what you want > (particularly now that protected objects are available). There would likely > have to be some restrictions placed on the form of the task; see section D.7 > of the Ada Rationale for examples. Of course, you can usually use > alternatives to Ada tasking, such as direct calls to a POSIX-compliant > run-time a la C as well, so it's certainly no worse that what you'll get in > other languages. > > I was thinking at the language level. As you point out yourself, there is nothing inherent in the language that prevents a compiler from doing what I want, but the problem is much like garbage collection. It's allowed, but you cannot count on it being there, so your programs will not really be portable to another platform or compiler if you use it. I agree that it's no better in other languages. -- Kabelsalat ist gesund. Ole-Hj. Kristensen