Re: [Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] Simple versus Recursive Mutexes

2016-02-06 Thread Ben Coman
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Ben Coman wrote: > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:16 AM, Ben Coman wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:35 AM, Eliot Miranda >> wrote: >>> Hi Ben, >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Ben Coman wrote: While we are in the process of revising the Mutex i

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] Simple versus Recursive Mutexes

2016-02-05 Thread Ben Coman
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:16 AM, Ben Coman wrote: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:35 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote: >> Hi Ben, >> >> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Ben Coman wrote: >>> >>> >>> While we are in the process of revising the Mutex infrastructure [1] >>> to use dedicated primitives rather than r

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] Simple versus Recursive Mutexes

2016-02-04 Thread Denis Kudriashov
Hi Ben. 2016-02-04 18:16 GMT+01:00 Ben Coman : > SimpleMutex>>critical: aBlock > Processor activeProcess == owner > ifTrue: [self error: 'recursive locks will kill you' ]. > ^ super critical: aBlock > This can be easily implemented with current primitive (I use inverted v