On Nov 1, 2016, at 6:00 PM, Douglas von Roeder wrote: > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:57 PM, David Adams <[email protected]> wrote: > >> For what it's worth, I was working at 4D in Cupertino when 4D Server >> shipped. We had big arguments in the US office about IP communications and >> semaphores. (Most people really don't love semaphores.) Semaphores turned >> out to be the one and only reliable mechanism available. Unless something >> has changed, that's still going to be true. > > LR addressed that question directly at a Summit - don't know the year but > it was post-Schaumburg. The only command not susceptible to timeslicing is > Semaphore.
OK I can accept that. But what about this: <>counter_l := <>counter_l + 1 It does not contain any 4D commands. Can that line of code be time sliced, or will this line of code run atomically? Tim ******************************************** Tim Nevels Innovative Solutions 785-749-3444 [email protected] ******************************************** ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:[email protected] **********************************************************************
