Le 23/07/2016 10:49, Simon Walter a écrit :
On 07/23/2016 05:42 PM, Didier Kryn wrote:
Le 22/07/2016 18:21, Brian Nash a écrit :
For example, when I discovered multithreading, all my programs used it
in some way, even when it was unnecessary.
I sometimes use multithreading, but never mutexes. Mutex can be harmless
if there's only one. Otherwise better use select()/poll() or you'll
waste time or even dead-lock. It's amazing how the old select() paradigm
is so much better than the modern mutex. I see mutex as an invention to
relieve the programmer from thinking.
Really? I must be pretty stupid because I have think extra hard when
using mutexes... :(
Sorry if I hurted you. Maybe you thought hard to understand how to
not dead-lock.
The principle is to protect shared variables in such a way that you
can then roll every thread as if it was running alone - this is what I
meant by "relieve from thinking". With select() you must keep in mind
the interactions between the threads, and all your program is organized
around these interactions, with only one wait point per thread for all
possible events; therefore no dead-lock.
Didier
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
