More Delay/Semaphore "fun"
Gary Chambers
gazzaguru2 at btinternet.com
Fri Oct 12 21:39:46 UTC 2007
Seems like a reasonable way to go. Just grateful that the "interim" fixes are working for us!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> [mailto:squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org]On Behalf Of
> Andreas Raab
> Sent: 10 October 2007 3:27 AM
> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
> Subject: Re: More Delay/Semaphore "fun"
>
>
> Craig Latta wrote:
> > Although still a hack, it seems simple and sufficiently
> cheap. Good
> > for a laugh, anyway. :)
>
> Actually, this is worthwhile to think about. We already have some unwind
> protection primitives and it seems quite all right to me to have another
> "marker primitive" that could be evaluated upon termination. As a matter
> of fact, we might redefine #ifCurtailed: to take an optional argument
> which gets to see the suspendingList (or the entire process). Something
> along the lines of:
>
> [self wait] ifCurtailed:[:list|
> list == self ifTrue:[caught := false].
> ].
>
> At which point all the VM needs to do is to take the process primitively
> #offList which we need anyways.
>
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|