[Vm-dev] Re: [Pharo-project] BlockClosure>>ensure: implementation

Andreas.Raab andreas.raab at gmx.de
Wed Oct 24 12:17:20 UTC 2012

Igor Stasenko wrote
> Hmm.. your response puzzles me even more.
> just simple example to show a controversy:
> [ do something ] ensure: [ semaphore signal. anotherSemaphore wait ].

That isn't the point Eliot is making. The #valueNoContextSwitch affects the
*receiver* of the ensure: message (not the argument) and only insofar as
activating (entering) it is concerned; i.e., it prevents a process switch
while entering the ensured block. I believe that originally we were trying
to avoid any deviation from the interpreter's behavior and added this simply
to ensure complete compatibility with the context VMs, but in hindsight I'm
not certain this ever had any effect.

  - Andreas

View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Re-Pharo-project-BlockClosure-ensure-implementation-tp4652717p4652763.html
Sent from the Squeak VM mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Vm-dev mailing list