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
