Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joe Schaefer wrote:
[...]
> > Obviously I don't see why that is so. In fact, I see that it is
> > already implemented in parts of mod_perl, for instance when
> > registering a pool-cleanup callback:
> > $sp->cleanup_register(sub { print @{ $_[0] || [] } }, [1..3]);
> > Here the currently active interpreter has its refcount incremented
> > by mpxs_apr_pool_cleanup_register(). AFAICT the interpreter is not
> > allowed to reenter the thread pool until this cleanup has run. I
> > don't see how PerlInterpScope influences this behavior at all.
> > I still believe that this is the right approach, and again I wonder
> > why this cannot also be used in the situations you cited earlier in
> > this thread.
>
> Anti-Example 1: parent interpreter compiles the anon-sub, which
> interpreter are you going to stick to that anon-sub?
A: As I stated, I expect the intepreter which invokes cleanup_register()
to also be the one which executes the anonymous sub during $sp's pool
cleanup. Are you saying that doesn't work if the interpreter is actually
a clone, and not the parent?
Bear in mind I'm learning about threads|ithreads as I go here, so please
don't intrepret my inquisitiveness as anything other than naivete. I'm
just trying to sort all this out so I can write a few useful patches.
As I slowly digest the rest of your post, it looks like I'll
derive the most benefit from it by writing a few tests first. :-)
--
Joe Schaefer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
