Re: Ada Protected Object Turorial #2: Overview of Tasks

[Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com>]

Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com> writes:

> All in all, a good rule in Ada 95 is not to use ATC.

Do you feel the same way about abort statements?

To me, abort statements and ATC seem equally error prone.
I wouldn't go so far as to outlaw either one, but it seems to me that if
you want to outlaw ATC, you should also want to outlaw abort
statements.

>... I know
> that I generally say that any rule saying "don't use feature
> X" is a mistake since the feature would not be in the language
> unless it had been carefully thought out and understood to
> be useful.

I don't really agree with that -- it implies that the language designer
was a god.  This issue is a good example -- you have every right to
express the opinion "don't use ATC", so long as you realize that you are
really saying that the language designers made a mistake in putting the
feature in in the first place.

I don't happen to agree with that, because polling seems too painful in
some cases.

>... However, in my opinion [not new, I strongly opposed
> adding this feature] ATC is NOT a desirable feature in Ada :-)

Yes, I remember.  ;-)

I also remember that many of the anti-ATC reviewers also outlawed abort
statements -- but I don't remember your opinion on that point.

- Bob