On 10/16/2013 12:45 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4151 does not contain the
info in your post starting this thread, nor does it contain any link to
this thread.
Yeah, more cross references please.
I personally dislike the DIP proliferation for anything
On 10/13/2013 09:47 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
* Alex's one from MCI:
https://github.com/lycus/mci/blob/f9165c287f92e4ef70674828fbadb33ee3967547/src/mci/core/weak.d
I remember talking about this with Alex.
He wanted to add some functions to the GC and this is what I came up
with
17.10.2013 12:09, Martin Nowak пишет:
On 10/13/2013 09:47 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
* Alex's one from MCI:
https://github.com/lycus/mci/blob/f9165c287f92e4ef70674828fbadb33ee3967547/src/mci/core/weak.d
I remember talking about this with Alex.
He wanted to add some functions to
On Thursday, 17 October 2013 at 08:09:24 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On 10/13/2013 09:47 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
* Alex's one from MCI:
https://github.com/lycus/mci/blob/f9165c287f92e4ef70674828fbadb33ee3967547/src/mci/core/weak.d
I remember talking about this with Alex.
He wanted
16.10.2013 3:20, Sean Kelly пишет:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 22:09:17 UTC, Robert wrote:
The problem is that destructors and thus the registered hooks for the
dispose events are called when threads are already resumed. If this
wasn't the case there would actually be no problems.
Gotcha.
16.10.2013 3:20, Sean Kelly пишет:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 22:09:17 UTC, Robert wrote:
The problem is that destructors and thus the registered hooks for the
dispose events are called when threads are already resumed. If this
wasn't the case there would actually be no problems.
Gotcha.
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 at 10:02:28 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij
wrote:
16.10.2013 3:20, Sean Kelly пишет:
Looking at the code... I think you'll get this to work, but
manipulating such user-mode weak references seems really
expensive. Why not work on a DIP to get them built in? For
example,
14.10.2013 17:42, robert пишет:
Damn it, you are right I did not think this through, somehow thought the
use in addrOf is enough, which is of course crap. Thank's a lot for your
time, I'll fix this ASAP.
So, here are your revised version:
Perhaps I missed it from skimming, but why are we using atomic
operations here anyway? Has testing revealed that it's necessary?
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 18:57:16 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
Perhaps I missed it from skimming, but why are we using atomic
operations here anyway? Has testing revealed that it's
necessary?
I presume you don't mean running some code and then seeing if it
breaks as a test to see if atomic
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 19:51:00 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 18:57:16 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
Perhaps I missed it from skimming, but why are we using atomic
operations here anyway? Has testing revealed that it's
necessary?
I presume you don't mean running
On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:57:14 +0200, Sean Kelly wrote:
Perhaps I missed it from skimming, but why are we using atomic
operations here anyway? Has testing revealed that it's necessary?
I believe it is the why make it easy when we can make it complicated?
approach...
So, here are your revised version:
https://github.com/phobos-x/phobosx/blob/1f0016c84c2043da0b9d2dafe65f54fcf6b6b8fa/source/phobosx/signal.d
Sorry, but you are making the same mistake again.
Yeah, I made a mistake again. In my mind it was ok because o is
read from a shared variable, but this
Well sure, but why not use a Mutex? What does trying to sort
out a correct lock-free algorithm gain us here?
It is not about concurrency for general purpose (phobosx.signal
is no more thread safe than std.signals), but for the GC. A
reference is hidden from the GC, when making it visible
See also: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4150
Best regards,
Robert
On 10/13/2013 11:24 PM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
13.10.2013 22:19, Walter Bright пишет:
On 10/13/2013 12:47 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
--- Proposal ---
Please post as a DIP:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIPs
The trouble with it as a n.g. posting is they tend to scroll off and be
forgotten.
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 22:09:17 UTC, Robert wrote:
The problem is that destructors and thus the registered hooks
for the dispose events are called when threads are already
resumed. If this wasn't the case there would actually be no
problems.
Gotcha. Looking at the code... I think
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 23:20:39 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 22:09:17 UTC, Robert wrote:
The problem is that destructors and thus the registered hooks
for the dispose events are called when threads are already
resumed. If this wasn't the case there would
13.10.2013 22:19, Walter Bright пишет:
On 10/13/2013 12:47 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
--- Proposal ---
Please post as a DIP:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIPs
The trouble with it as a n.g. posting is they tend to scroll off and be
forgotten.
Why? There is already enhancement request 4151 to
13.10.2013 21:36, Robert пишет:
* Robert's one from his new `std.signals` implementation proposal:
https://github.com/phobos-x/phobosx/blob/d0cc6b45511465ef1d493b0d7226ccb990ae84e8/source/phobosx/signal.d
Obviously I don't see it, otherwise I would have fixed it. Maybe you
could
1. Have you read `gc.gc.fullcollect`, I mean a general function
structure, not every line? If not, read it or you have no idea
how collection performs.
I haven't, I relied on: http://dlang.org/garbage.html , but I
will now - thanks. If the information at garbage.html isn't
completely wrong I
14.10.2013 13:04, robert пишет:
Why would I be angry with a stranger who insults me in public? I
don't understand your concerns.
No insults assumed! Just ugly truth about all of us. )
If you are more
experienced in this area I am glad if you share your insights and
Walter and Andrei often
Easy, man. I have never met morons here, except, probably,
myself.
My apologies if I got you wrong!
So you code is incorrect and lets show it. When you give your
code for eating to the compiler, it can does whatever it want
but guarantee your program will work as you have written it
--- Proposal ---
The proposal is to add weak reference functionality based on
`unstd.memory.weakref`. It can be placed e.g. in `core.memory`.
Source code:
https://bitbucket.org/denis-sh/unstandard/src/HEAD/unstd/memory/weakref.d
Documentation:
Am 13.10.2013 09:47, schrieb Denis Shelomovskij:
--- Proposal ---
The proposal is to add weak reference functionality based on
`unstd.memory.weakref`. It can be placed e.g. in `core.memory`.
Source code:
https://bitbucket.org/denis-sh/unstandard/src/HEAD/unstd/memory/weakref.d
Documentation:
Denis, you forgot to say that it's need to download yours unstd
library source too. Also there's only visualdproj to build it.
Am 13.10.2013 09:47, schrieb Denis Shelomovskij:
--- Proposal ---
The proposal is to add weak reference functionality based on
`unstd.memory.weakref`. It can be placed e.g. in `core.memory`.
Source code:
https://bitbucket.org/denis-sh/unstandard/src/HEAD/unstd/memory/weakref.d
Documentation:
13.10.2013 12:55, Sönke Ludwig пишет:
Am 13.10.2013 09:47, schrieb Denis Shelomovskij:
Just to reassure, the following race-condition doesn't exist, right? It
looks like GC.addRoot() makes guarantees by taking the GC lock or
something similar?
time -
thread1: GC collection |
13.10.2013 12:36, Benjamin Thaut пишет:
Will rt_attachDisposeEvent also work with std.allocator? Or does it rely
on the GC running?
What exactly do you mean? `rt_attachDisposeEvent` adds delegate to
`object.__monitor.devt` array which is called from `rt_finalize2 -
_d_monitordelete -
* Robert's one from his new `std.signals` implementation proposal:
https://github.com/phobos-x/phobosx/blob/d0cc6b45511465ef1d493b0d7226ccb990ae84e8/source/phobosx/signal.d
Obviously I don't see it, otherwise I would have fixed it. Maybe you
could elaborate a bit on your claim?
And line 61: what exactly mean a two !! in alive property?
+1 weakref
On 10/13/13 11:07 AM, Michael wrote:
And line 61: what exactly mean a two !! in alive property?
Convert this to bool.
Andrei
On 10/13/2013 12:47 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
--- Proposal ---
Please post as a DIP:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIPs
The trouble with it as a n.g. posting is they tend to scroll off and be
forgotten.
On Sunday, 13 October 2013 at 07:47:55 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij
wrote:
--- Proposal ---
The proposal is to add weak reference functionality based on
`unstd.memory.weakref`. It can be placed e.g. in `core.memory`.
Source code:
On Sunday, 13 October 2013 at 18:11:38 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 10/13/13 11:07 AM, Michael wrote:
And line 61: what exactly mean a two !! in alive property?
Convert this to bool.
Andrei
Thanks)
On Sunday, 13 October 2013 at 07:47:55 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij
wrote:
--- Proposal ---
The proposal is to add weak reference functionality based on
`unstd.memory.weakref`. It can be placed e.g. in `core.memory`.
+1
36 matches
Mail list logo
