From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: ADA Tasks
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:15:08 GMT
Date: 2002-12-02T15:15:08+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <wccbs44qwoz.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: a5a588a6.0212011837.5e378fd6@posting.google.com
khurmie@hotmail.com (Khuram Imtiaz) writes:
> Is it possible to have tasks which contain both (entries/accepts and
> calls).Could this be a bad idea? If so, why? can someone explain it
> with a pseudo code. I would appreciate your help in this regard.
Yes, a task is allowed to contain both entries/accepts and entry calls.
There is nothing particularly "bad" about it, if it meets your needs.
For example, task A might call task B's entry, and as part of the work
in (or after) the accept statement in B, B might call an entry of task
C.
However, protected objects are often a better way to communicate than
rendezvous, because they decouple the communicating tasks. They are
also more efficient on many implementations.
- Bob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-02 15:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-12-02 2:37 ADA Tasks Khuram Imtiaz
2002-12-02 4:56 ` James S. Rogers
2002-12-02 6:56 ` Richard Riehle
2002-12-02 15:15 ` Robert A Duff [this message]
2002-12-02 15:46 ` Jean-Pierre Rosen
2002-12-03 14:37 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2002-12-03 22:06 ` Simon Wright
2002-12-04 13:52 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox