Simon Marlow wrote:
The only way I can see to do this is to add a lock field to the MVar. And
since this lock would look very much like another MVar, you may as well just
use another MVar to lock it (after all, that adds exactly zero extra
complication to the system :-).
Absolutely.
There's
Sun, 9 Apr 2000 13:54:47 -0700, Sigbjorn Finne [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Wouldn't be nice to have such function?
Have you tried using Concurrent.isEmptyMVar ?
isEmptyMVar is not enough to implement tryTakeMVar (but tryTakeMVar
would suffice for isEmptyMVar). Just after checking that it is
Would it be possible to implement an operation to lock an MVar without
any extra expense? So that the thread owning the MVar can do things to
it, but no other thread can. If it is possible, I suggest that it be
added and it would solve Marcin's problem (isEmptyMVar would then suffice).
Wouldn't be nice to have such function?
I wanted to translate a thread example written in Ruby and realized
that it's impossible to write that function using MVar primitives
provided; and no module seems to provide an equivalent using
another kind of concurrent variable. I had to simulate
