[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Mobile variables
Richard Beton writes:
> Adrian Lawrence wrote:
> > 1) A mobile variable is declared in the usual way but with a prefix
> > MOBILE. This decoration informs the compiler that the
> > variable will be MOBILE at some point and allows separate compilation
> > of processes.
> > Example: INITIAL MOBILE INT IS [1,2] :
> Because 'mobile' variables are actually carefully-controlled shared variables,
> wouldn't it be better to use the keyword SHARED thus:
> INITIAL SHARED INT IS [1,2] :
Maybe. I said as much in my first posting. It's just that when a variable is
mobile, we specifically exclude (all right, simultaneous) sharing. But
having a shared cup doesn't imply simultaneous use by two people --usually. :-)
So perhaps I am wrong.
Does this mean that you want the abbreviation
x_mobile IS MOBILE x_shared:
x_mobile IS SHARED x_shared:
If we are to have a new keyword anyway, then it seems clearest to use it
everywhere. But I don't have any very strong views on this. Anyone?
A E Lawrence, MA., DPhil. adrian.lawrence@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MicroProcessor Unit, 13, Banbury Road, Oxford. OX2 6NN. UK.
Voice: (+44)-1865-273274, Fax: (+44)-1865-273275