Re: Distributed shared channels (via SEMAPHOREs)

[Richard Beton <rdb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Richard Beton wrote:
> 
> One small question nags at me:
> 
> Why is the data record syntax in occam2.1
> 
> DATA TYPE SOMETHING
>   RECORD
>     TYPE1 element1, element2:
>     TYPE2 element3:
> :
> 
> different from the channel type syntax
> 
> CHAN TYPE COMMS
>   CHAN OF REQUEST request:
>   CHAN OF REPLY reply:
> :

I've just answered my own question by reading the occam3 draft manual.
CHAN TYPE requires the RECORD keyword in the same way that DATA TYPE
does. That suits my craving for orthogonality :-)

Rick
-- 
              Richard Beton BSc MInstP CPhys
      Roke Manor Research, Romsey, Hampshire SO51 0ZN
-------  Standard disclaimer about my own views etc  -------
           See http://www1.roke.co.uk/WHR/WHR.html