-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 08:47:17PM -0500, David Megginson wrote: > Martin van Beilen writes: > > It may be necessary to implement a locking scheme to prevent > > simultaneous access and deletion of a property. (Only if DELETE > > is set, of course.) > > From my experience with Java, I think the trick with threading is > to do all write access from a single thread; otherwise, things get > amazingly ugly (personally, I'd prefer doing all read access from that > thread as well). Working from a single thread is obviously the easiest solution, where possible. However, in the case of our property system, potentially any part of the code may want to access those properties. We'd have to assign one thread as the property manager, and do all property access via the/an inter-thread messaging system. Not very nice, IMHO. The only trivial solution I can think of is using one single master lock for all dynamic access. Not particularly elegant either. I can probably come up with a better (per-node) scheme, but I need to t(h)read very carefully and give it some more thought. I'm dropping this issue for now and will start working on the cloud layers. - -- Regards, "I RADIS, do you?" =Martin= http://www.iradis.org/ PGP: FE87448B DDF8 677C 9244 D119 4FE0 AE3A 37CF 3458 FE87 448B From: Martin van Beilen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] New subsystem: FGEnvironment In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 08:47:17PM -0500 X-S-Issue: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002/02/25 01:16:48 a8e24c3bfcb47364f995b5835fa3f007 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAjx5gngACgkQN880WP6HRItozACgoQYuPkPzkHpAIWQuQrrY01f9 enUAnjIyPHx8eoqRofpsTG3CPqMMpqc+ =5iLF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
