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
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local02.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.sun.com!news.sun.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:33:33 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Naming convention to identify functions with side effects
References: 
 <5654ee5f-aa9f-4fff-87e0-45854b850f26@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>
 <29ac62e1-78da-4048-ad95-8f88a29f7d31@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
 <h9civa1o39f6$.79cdhcp3sfms$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <48e13f14$0$6610$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
From: Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen
 <ole-hjalmar.kristensen@substitute_employer_here.com>
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Date: 02 Oct 2008 14:33:32 +0200
Message-ID: <wvbrtzbvgorn.fsf@sun.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cache-Post-Path: news1nwk!unknown@khepri42.norway.sun.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.1 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: 
 sv3-neCdtw3YJ7cz630mC8TEnENgBCMxIM8O5lIlq9pgQVdP0Ld0gwsBVFNmNktOVrsAfKPVm+OOP+up8Jo!MslaW2tIYNse2eCYH77nKlKA3GY6oj3wGggt1J6qpPnYM0L/qIqm1Ttl
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.39
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2192
Date: 2008-10-02T14:33:32+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

How would you implement the lock in youre case? I prefer not to mess
around with semaphores, but use protected objects instead. In that
case keeping the lock across the two calls is not so trivial.

>>>>> "GB" == Georg Bauhaus <see.reply.to@maps.futureapps.de> writes:

<snip>

    GB> Some issues become more obvious in a concurrent setting
    GB> perhaps,

    GB>    Web_Page.Load ("http://www.irvine.com");

    GB>    if Web_Page.Is_Loaded then...

    GB> There needs to be a lock of some sort joining the two calls.
    GB> Otherwise, the Web_Page object might have changed
    GB> between the two calls, a logic error.
    GB> Again, it might be tempting to pack the two calls in just
    GB> one in order to hide the locking mechanism, to give the
    GB> illusion of atomicity. But shouldn't normal Ada
    GB> concurrency features be employed instead?

    GB> If concurrency features of Ada are used instead, the
    GB> naming problem is also gone:
    GB> the commands (procedures) can be verbs and the queries
    GB> (predicate functions) can be named "Is_Something" or
    GB> "Has_Something".


-- 
   C++: The power, elegance and simplicity of a hand grenade.