At 09:17 PM 9/6/00 -0400, Steven W McDougall wrote: > > leave the locking to the coder and keep perl clean. > >If we don't provide this level of locking internally, then > > async { $a = $b } > >is liable to crash the interpreter. Nope. ilock($b); fetch($b); iunlock($b); ilock($a); store($a); iunlock($a); $a or $b may be messed with, but if shared they'll be locked for just as long as perl needs to guarantee a consistent state. That lock won't span ops, though some ops (eval, or ops with vtable functions written in perl) may last a while... Dan --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Alan Burlison
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Uri Guttman
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Steven W McDougall
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Alan Burlison
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Alan Burlison
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Alan Burlison
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Alan Burlison
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads Alan Burlison