nil in SuspendedDelays???

John M McIntosh johnmci at
Tue Jan 24 04:19:54 UTC 2006

Er, if we're messing with this, and with rescheduling processes when  
you change priorities, do we want to consider how Processor>>yield  
behaves? Should it allow a lower
priority process to run if there are no processes runable at the same  

On 23-Jan-06, at 7:54 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

> Cees De Groot wrote:
>> Should this be adopted?
> The VW fix does seem overly complex for Squeak - the main issue is  
> that in Semaphore>>critical: we can be interrupted between the  
> following two lines:
>   self wait.
>   [blockValue := mutuallyExcludedBlock value] ensure:[self signal].
> Simply moving #wait inside the ensure'd block will cure the problem  
> (for very, very specific and nitpicky reasons that I'm not going to  
> explain in detail unless someone actually wants to know ;-)
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas

John M. McIntosh <johnmci at> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list