We can have cases where scope gives a perform-all for a task, it begins, then scope gives an interrupt-task which suspends that task at the exact same simulation time. This doesn't really make that much sense.
What should really be happening, is that scope should look at all the tasks trying to start at the same time, and respond with what should happen with each of them.
This will be very difficult or impossible: even if we were able to have scope look at all RC tasks, a task in BE could start another task at the exact same time. It is impossible for scope to know about this new task in the first place.
Furthermore, the newly RC task could go on to interrupt the BE task, so we can't even theoretically detect this immediate interrupt case.
We can have cases where scope gives a perform-all for a task, it begins, then scope gives an interrupt-task which suspends that task at the exact same simulation time. This doesn't really make that much sense. What should really be happening, is that scope should look at all the tasks trying to start at the same time, and respond with what should happen with each of them. This will be very difficult or impossible: even if we were able to have scope look at all RC tasks, a task in BE could start another task at the exact same time. It is impossible for scope to know about this new task in the first place. Furthermore, the newly RC task could go on to interrupt the BE task, so we can't even theoretically detect this immediate interrupt case.