[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Conflicting Priorities in occam


Barry writes:
> This discussion brings back memories of a tentative discussion 
> at a WoTUG meeting last year, or the year before - I can't 
> quite remember who was taking part, Andy, Oyvind, ...?

Primary suspect: Andy - Witnesses: Oyvind, Barry etc.

Barry writes:
> reasoning for it) that priority was a property of a 
> message, not a process.

So, were you to introduce this into the language, would you 
attach priorities to CHAN (PRI CHAN) or to PROTOCOL CASE
(PROTOCOL PRI CASE?) i.e. on each tag in a variant 
protocol. If PRI CASE, should priorities be global or 
local within the PROTOCOL? 

I'd love this, I could remove all my couple of PRI PARs
from my systems.

Barry writes:
> [This is getting too much like a public private conversation 
> (only 2 voices, but broadcasting loudly!)

For some strange reason UK is behind the rest of Europe (even
Spain) by 1h. For another strange reason, academics seem to enjoy
time skewing the midnight hour more than what real real-time
programmers can do, so at least my reply will have to be 
somewhat late/early. AND, if we could clean up these lists
so that I don't get n-tuples of each message, it would be easier
to know if "now AFTER before" is indeed positive!


Oyvind Teig                             |  oyvind.teig@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Navia Maritime AS, division Autronica   |  oyvind.teig@xxxxxxxxxxxx
7005 Trondhem                           |     Tel.: +47 73 58 12 68
Norway                                  |     Fax.: +47 73 91 93 20
http://www.navia.no                         http://www.autronica.no