On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 10:06 PM, krovosos <[email protected]> wrote:
> Handle<Value> yield(const Arguments& args)
> {
> v8::Unlocker unlocker;
> Sleep(5); // for example
> // or even Sleep(0) just to give away control of v8 mutex
> }
>
>
Don't use the word "yield" - if i'm not mistaken it is a reserved word for
potential future use in the JS language.
Or maybe every iteration if speed if not an issue for this long-
> running in background thread.
> Than other scripts in different threads can still run? Am I right?
>
Coincidentally (and inspired by Ryan's post, above), i just (over the past
few hours) implemented setTimeout() for v8 and to test it i implemented
sleep() using the approach you just used. Thus, it appears that the answer
to your question is Yes. That said, i haven't tried running several
contexts, only a few threads within a single context.
My sleep() impl looks like:
v8::Handle<v8::Value> sleep(const v8::Arguments& argv)
{
int st = argv.Length() ? static_cast<uint32_t>(
argv[0]->ToInteger()->Value() ) : -1;
int rc = -1;
if(0<=st)
{
v8::Unlocker ul;
rc = ::sleep( st );
}
return v8::Integer::New(rc);
}
the set/cancelTimeout() impls are somewhat more involved, but mostly because
the ability to cancelTimeout() requires so much internal overhead (e.g.
locking the timer list, which means adding a mutex class to your tree, if
you don't already have one, which i didn't).
--
----- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
v8-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
