Article View: net.lang.ada
Article #870entries as generic actuals
From: "Pat Rogers, High Tech Lab"
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1986 13:06
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1986 13:06
17 lines
1374 bytes
1374 bytes
The question about the legality of passing an entry as the actual to a generic formal subprogram parameter is easy enough: see RM 12.3/4, and a couple of other places too. Here's one for you : why is it legal to declare an entry in a task declaration, and then not give a corresponding accept ? You have to give supbprogram bodies for subprograms declared in the visible part of a package, so why not for tasks ? Who cares, you ask ? If you call such an entry, it will suspend indefinitely. I can find no references to this in the LRM. Anybody know where one is if I'm wrong, or what the rationale is if I'm right ? (For what it's worth (apologies, etc), the DEC compiler took it without objecting...) Thanks ! Pat Rogers PRogers@Ada20.isi.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8607100354.AA11509@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!uhcl.CSNET!ROGERSShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!uhcl.CSNET!ROGERS
From: ROGERS@uhcl.CSNET ("Pat Rogers, High Tech Lab")
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Subject: entries as generic actuals
Message-ID: <8607100354.AA11509@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Wed, 9-Jul-86 09:06:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8607100354.AA11509
Posted: Wed Jul 9 09:06:00 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 11-Jul-86 07:11:37 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 17