TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
"C. Daniel Cooper" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 20 May 2002 11:29:05 -0400
Reply-To:
Stephen Leake <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Stephen Leake <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
"C. Daniel Cooper" <[log in to unmask]> writes:

> a) single 'Access: The "proper" thing to do is a technical tweak, as
> described at <http://www.adaic.org/docs/95style/html/sec_7/7-3-2.html>
> Define a single 'Access constant along with each callback subprogram
> declaration, and use that constant for all references.

This certainly sounds right to me. This is a light-weight solution,
compared to polymorphism or tasking, as others have proposed.

> This isn't a bad solution, but it presumes the subscribers know how
> the publisher is implemented (or will evolve).

I don't follow this objection. All the subscriber needs to know is the
profile of the callback; what else can change that affects the
declaration of the single 'access constant?

--
-- Stephe

ATOM RSS1 RSS2