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