Hi all,


in the context of the current Transcript debate [1], I am trying to figure out whether, and why Marcel's proposed implementation of <noContextSwitch> [2] could work.


As a minimum example to test #valueNoContextSwitch, I tried the following:


"Try to run this infinite loop unpreemptively."

[

[[false] whileFalse] valueNoContextSwitch.

self inform: #done

] forkAt: Processor userBackgroundPriority.


Now I would have expected my image (its UI process) to freeze while p2 is running unpreemptively. But - nothing happens, i.e., all other processes are still activated! I also exchanged valueNoContextSwitch with valueUninterruptably (which I implemented using primitive 123 analogously to <noContextSwitch>) with the same result.


Here is my question: Am I misunderstanding the concept of unpreemptive/uninterruptable execution (are those two terms really synonyms?), or is unpreempted execution broken?

Assuming the former is the case, what else would be a good and simple way to find out if a process is being run unpreemptively?

And do we have any good documentation of this concept - self-documenting tests will be preferred? :-)


Best,

Christoph


[1] http://forum.world.st/Transcript-error-when-forceUpdate-false-td5126397.html

[2] http://forum.world.st/The-Inbox-Compiler-mt-454-mcz-td5126568.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20210201/d793af09/attachment.html>