On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM, <macr...@djc.net> wrote: > Taking > http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/Multithreading/ThreadSafetySummary/ThreadSafetySummary.html > as a sign, the answer appears to be: > neither of these can be safe, the latter even more so since the result is > unordered.
Yes, that's not too surprising I guess > If one is paranoid, not even sizing the array beforehand (a very good idea) > is safe, unless someone can definitively state that no one (inc. MacRuby) > will > be modifying/moving/otherwise manipulating this mutable object while you > are.... That's certainly not specified behavior, although I *think* it would always be safe in JRuby and MRI (don't know about MacRuby). > a bit of a disappointment, since a) we know resizing occurs far less > frequently then access (in general) b) making this all thread safe can > easily be done at the Framework level c) most of the time, the behavior is > exactly what we see here w.r.t. sizing (e.g. it grows UP, never down, and > not up and down ... until GC kicks in and removes it all) In JRuby we ship a nonstandard extension JRuby::Synchronized you can include into any class (or object) to force all methods to be synchronized. The example in that case would look like: @result = [] @result.extend JRuby::Synchronized Or even better, create a SyncArray subclass that includes it. I'd like for there to be a standard way to do this across Ruby impls (in particular, I'd like a standard set of thread-safe collections in Ruby proper), but perhaps the JRuby solution will provide a starting point for everyone else. - Charlie _______________________________________________ MacRuby-devel mailing list MacRuby-devel@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macruby-devel
