On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 16:39:45 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 7/22/21 1:46 AM, seany wrote:
[...]
Correct. You must synchronize on ii.
[...]
This isn't valid code, because you can't append to an integer.
Though I think I know what you meant. Is it thread-safe
(assuming the ar
On 7/22/21 1:46 AM, seany wrote:
Consider :
int [] ii;
foreach(i,dummy; parallel(somearray)) {
ii ~= somefunc(dummy);
}
This is not safe, because all threads are accessing the same array and
trying to add values and leading to collision.
Correct. You must synchronize o
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 09:02:56 UTC, jfondren wrote:
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 07:51:04 UTC, seany wrote:
OK.
Sorry for the bad question : what if i pregenerate every
possible key, and fill the associative array where each such
key contains some invalid number, say -1 ?
You mean wh
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 07:51:04 UTC, seany wrote:
OK.
Sorry for the bad question : what if i pregenerate every
possible key, and fill the associative array where each such
key contains some invalid number, say -1 ?
You mean where each value contains some invalid number, and the
AA's k
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 06:47:52 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
But even if it did, we wouldn't want synchronized blocks in
parallelization because a synchronized block would run a single
thread at a time and nothing would be running in parallel
anymore.
But it only affects the block, the othe
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 07:27:52 UTC, jfondren wrote:
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 07:23:36 UTC, seany wrote:
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 05:53:01 UTC, jfondren wrote:
No. Consider
https://programming.guide/hash-tables-open-vs-closed-addressing.html
The page says :
A key is always
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 07:23:36 UTC, seany wrote:
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 05:53:01 UTC, jfondren wrote:
No. Consider
https://programming.guide/hash-tables-open-vs-closed-addressing.html
The page says :
A key is always stored in the bucket it's hashed to.
What if my keys are a
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 05:53:01 UTC, jfondren wrote:
No. Consider
https://programming.guide/hash-tables-open-vs-closed-addressing.html
The page says :
A key is always stored in the bucket it's hashed to.
What if my keys are always unique?
On 7/21/21 11:01 PM, frame wrote:
> This is another parallel foreach body conversion question.
> Isn't the compiler clever enough to put a synchronized block here?
parallel is a *function* (not a D feature). So, the compiler might have
to analyze the entire code to suspect race conditions. No,
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 05:46:25 UTC, seany wrote:
But what about this :
int [ string ] ii;
ii.length = somearray.length;
foreach(i,dummy; parallel(somearray)) {
string j = generateUniqueString(i);
ii[j] ~= somefunc(dummy);
}
Is this also guaranteed thread safe
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 05:53:01 UTC, jfondren wrote:
On Thursday, 22 July 2021 at 05:46:25 UTC, seany wrote:
But what about this :
int [ string ] ii;
ii.length = somearray.length;
foreach(i,dummy; parallel(somearray)) {
string j = generateUniqueString(i);
ii[j] ~=
Consider :
int [] ii;
foreach(i,dummy; parallel(somearray)) {
ii ~= somefunc(dummy);
}
This is not safe, because all threads are accessing the same
array and trying to add values and leading to collision.
But :
int [] ii;
ii.length = somearray.length;
foreach(
12 matches
Mail list logo
