TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text 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]>
Date:
Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:55:42 -0500
Reply-To:
Randy Brukardt <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Subject:
From:
Randy Brukardt <[log in to unmask]>
X-cc:
In-Reply-To:
<01C0FFCF.B8B8B600@IGNITOR>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
> Hi All,
>
> Can someone confirm that it is still implementation defined whether I/O
> operations (Put, Get, 'Write, 'Read) are atomic, blocking, or subject to
> Priority_Ceiling.  In quick review of the manual & rational, I found the
> following:

...

You forgot 9.5.1(18): IO subprograms are "potentially blocking". (And thus
cannot be called from a protected object.) Thus, the question about
Priority_Ceiling is moot.

Of course, that doesn't say whether they REALLY are blocking.

                Randy Brukardt.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2