This is one of those features where I think I need to see the complete documentation written first before any code is checked in. In particular, I have some reservations on how this explicitly introduces activities and reservation counts concepts to the language without them ever appearing elsewhere in the language reference. I'm also not willing to accept the format with which the additional information is added without some additional discussion. Also the concept of giving the activities a unique identifier. Since activities are pooled and reused, it needs to be defined how that all plays out. This feature, while useful, needs a lot more discussion before it is put in place.
Rick On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 7:21 AM Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. Probably putting M as the trailing letter after > the alphabetic letter as Mike suggests is the best option. Omitting the > trailing M would switch back to the simple form. Would that be acceptable > for everyone? > > ---rony > > > On 08.02.2023 21:24, Rick McGuire wrote: > > The special symbol characters "." and "_" are also available as > indicators. I'm a definite -1 to using environment variables and Erich has > also voiced his displeasure about that. > > Another option might be to allow a second keyword following the trace type > that indicates using the expanded form. It should also allow explicit > specification of the simple form too. > > Rick > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 2:46 PM Mike Cowlishaw <m...@speleotrove.com> wrote: > >> I would have put the M after the other letter because it's really a >> subsidiary option. If it's first it rather 'M'asks the main option? >> >> Mike >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Rony G. Flatscher [mailto:rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at] >> *Sent:* 08 February 2023 14:16 >> *To:* oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> *Subject:* [Oorexx-devel] Planning to add multithreaded (concurrent) >> tracing (Re: RFC for feature request "794 Concurrency request" >> >> Coming back to this RFE from 17 months ago which I would like to add to >> trunk. Without it one can hardly use TRACE for debugging multithreaded >> programs in a Rexx-like, i.e. easy manner. >> >> Currently having tried to incorporate the feedback about too many >> whitespaces between the new columns (Rexx interpreter instance number, >> Thread number, Activity number, reserved object pool). >> >> There was another idea about making this concurrency/multihreaded trace >> available without a need to define an environment variable >> RXTRACE_CONCURRENCY before starting a Rexx program. This post is about >> ideas of how to activate and deactivate concurrent tracing at runtime >> (either via the TRACE keyword instruction or the TRACE()-BIF) in a manner >> that is intuitive and easy to remember. >> >> One possibility would be to introduce new alphabetic options, this time >> with two letters by prepending the letter 'M' (for multithreaded as the >> letter c is already used for tracing commands and may therefore be >> irritating) to the existing alphabetic characters, hence defining the >> following semantics: >> >> *Trace* >> *Option, turn off MT* >> *Option, turn on MT* >> All >> A >> MA >> Command >> C >> MC >> Error >> E >> ME >> Failure >> F >> MF >> Intermediates >> I >> MI >> Labels >> L >> ML >> Normal >> N >> MN >> Off >> O >> - >> Results >> R >> MR >> >> >> >> This would have the benefit that anytime it becomes possible to turn on >> and to turn off multithreaded/concurrent tracing at runtime. >> >> What do you think? >> >> ---rony >> >> P.S.: The "fallback" would be to just add it as is, i.e. using the >> environment variable RXTRACE_CONCURRENCY, making the >> multithreaded/concurrent tracing a global option that needs to be set >> before running a Rexx program. >> >> >> On 05.09.2021 14:12, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> >> Almost a week ago Jean Louis Faucher registered feature request "794 >> Concurrency request", >> cf.<https://sourceforge.net/p/oorexx/feature-requests/794/> >> <https://sourceforge.net/p/oorexx/feature-requests/794/> together with a >> patch that implements the >> feature request. So far there have been no comments, hence "requesting for >> comments (RFC)" here as >> it may be the case that the RFE has been overlooked. >> >> --- >> >> IMHO this RFE is incredible helpful for debugging multi-threaded Rexx >> programs and for understanding >> how ooRexx dispatches multithreaded code. >> >> The way Jean Louis devised the implementation has practically no impact on >> the interpreter (unless >> one defines an environment variable "RXTRACE_CONCURRENCY=on" modelled after >> the existing >> "RXTRACE=ON" environment variable in which case helpful information gets >> generated for prefixing >> each trace output statement) makes it easy even for beginners (= students) >> to get insight and >> understand how ooRexx executes multithreaded programs. Some problems rooted >> in multithreaded Rexx >> code can be quickly located, understood and resolved with this feature. >> >> Having tested this concurrency trace feature with the most challenging >> JavaFX ooRexx programs I have >> been really impressed with the results. Using the ooRexx program >> "samples/tracer.rex" (included in >> the patch) to render the massive concurrency trace output of some JavaFX >> ooRexx programs to csv and >> importing the concurrency trace into a spreadsheet (e.g. Excel) makes it >> possible to analyze such >> massive concurrency traces in every possible detail using the spreadsheet >> features (e.g. filtering >> for a specific ooRexx interpreter instance or specific threads, pivots and >> the like). Therefore I >> uploaded one such test to this RFE such that one can directly get at the >> massive concurrency trace, >> the csv file created by "tracer.rex" from it and an Excel spreadsheet which >> was used to import the >> generated csv file. (I wished this feature had been available when devising >> some of the BSF4ooRexx >> JavaFX samples, which would have saved me literally weeks of debugging!) >> >> The patch implementing RFE 794 makes it really easy for ooRexx programmers >> to understand and to >> debug multithreaded ooRexx programs, saving them a *lot* of time trying to >> understand what happens, >> how concurrent statements get executed by the interpreter(s) and locating >> coding errors! >> >> ---rony >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >
_______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
