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-Thread: 103376,534dd301375921ac
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.219.170 with SMTP id pp10mr7531429pbc.1.1339795963660;
        Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:32:43 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 l9ni54947pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.readnews.com!transit3.readnews.com!panix!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is Text_IO.Put_Line() thread-safe?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:32:43 -0400
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc8vfoqn0k.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <93201f1a-d668-485e-83b4-492bc283f36e@googlegroups.com>
 <wcc395y57gm.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <cfd4cf5d-9fd5-4288-b2b8-304626b8ca16@googlegroups.com>
 <wcc7gv9ycni.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <546fc310-c898-417a-9c92-a5b12ef32591@googlegroups.com>
 <wcc7gv9zia8.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <4fdac8dc$0$9508$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <4smqkt4783bt.7xvwmlmb0lej$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: pcls6.std.com 1339795963 24318 192.74.137.71 (15 Jun 2012 21:32:43
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:32:43 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JI+fddM6/Fi2mAJZ12qJaOF1p4o=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: 2012-06-15T17:32:43-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

> The lower-level I/O yes.
>
> The higher-level I/O should be transaction-oriented in order to be
> task-safe.

Agreed.

> I disagree with Robert:

Sounded above like you were agreeing.  ;-)

 1) Transactions would be difficult to do taking
> into account language problems with MI and MD;

I don't understand that part.

2) I don't consider Text_IO
> design wrong.

With respect to task safety, or in general?

- Bob