(j3.2006) LOCK/UNLOCK question

[Bill Long]

Aleksandar Donev wrote:
> N.M. Maclaren wrote:
>> A far, far better solution would be to add a LOCK construct, and give
>> it the same exemption as CRITICAL.  TR fodder?
> It has been proposed (by me), as CRITICAL(lock). It was rejected. TR 
> fodder should not be used as a trash can, unless the reason for 
> rejection was: do it in the TR.


In that the bulk of the TR is focused on adding TEAMS back into the 
language, a natural extension of CRITICAL would be CRITICAL(team). 
Reconsidering CRITICAL(lock) as well at that point would be logical.

If I recall, CRITICAL(lock) failed before since the effect can be 
simulated easily with already available constructs (block; lock() ... 
unlock(); end block), that it mixed together data protection and 
statement protection concepts, and (probably most important) at some 
point the door has to close on new features for f08.

Cheers,
Bill





> Aleks
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at j3-fortran.org
> http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

-- 
Bill Long                                   longb at cray.com
Fortran Technical Support    &              voice: 651-605-9024
Bioinformatics Software Development         fax:   651-605-9142
Cray Inc., 1340 Mendota Heights Rd., Mendota Heights, MN, 55120