>SVDB 2691 _X_Yes ___No >http://www.eda.org/svdb/view.php?id=2691 Though I am voting in favor of this, it has occurred to me that there is a more elegant way to get this restriction: just specify that the self() method returns null or is an error if not invoked from an initial, always or forked process. Since there is no other way to get a handle to a process, this automatically prevents invoking any of the other methods on these. This is also consistent with the LRM's description of a thread or process, which does not include these other things (except maybe for continuous assignments). If they aren't considered processes, you shouldn't be able to get a process handle to one. After you eliminate kill(), await(), suspend() and resume(), there isn't much point in having a handle to these other things anyway. It would only leave status(), and most of the descriptions of the process status have to be extrapolated to apply to these other things. But there isn't enough time for an alternate proposal, and this proposal does solve the problem. Steven Sharp sharp@cadence.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Tue May 12 16:56:05 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 12 2009 - 16:56:21 PDT