Dynamic Priority

["Gerald Hilderink" <g.h.hilderink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

According to the following DYN PAR construct PRIORITY must be a process.

DYN PAR
  PRIORITY
    c ? priority
  P1
  P2
  P3
  P4

Perhaps it is nicer to hide PRIORITY inside the DYN PAR, which may improve
the construct.
PRIORITY *belongs* to the DYN PAR construct.
For example,

DYN PAR (CHAN OF PRIORITY c)
  P1
  P2
  P3
  P4

DYN PAR will read from channel c and rearrange the priorities.

A PRI PAR with an optional extension, such as

PRI PAR (CHAN OF PRIORITY c)
  P1
  P2
  P3
  P4

would do the same as DYN PAR (CHAN OF PRIORITY c) and

PAR (CHAN OF PRIORITY c)
  P1
  P2
  P3
  P4

could do the same as well.

A dynamic parallel construct could support different or equal priorities

0 |--> 1 different priority
1 |--> 0 different priority
2 |--> 2 different priority
3 |--> 2 equal priority as previous

which results in

PRI PAR
  P2
  P1
  PAR
    P3
    P4

Gerald.