Re: RFC 178 (v2) Lightweight Threads

[Chaim Frenkel]

>>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

DS> Well, there'll be safe access to individual variables when perl needs to 
DS> access them, but that's about it.

DS> Some things we can guarantee to be atomic. The auto increment/decrement 
DS> operators can be reasonably guaranteed atomic, for example. But I don't 
DS> think we should go further than "instantaneous access to shared data will 
DS> see consistent internal data structures".

This is going to be tricky. A list of atomic guarentees by perl will be
needed.

        $a[++$b];
        pop(@a);
        push(@a, @b);

Will these?

And given that users will be doing the locking. What do you see for
handling deadlock detection and recovery/retry.

<chaim>
-- 
Chaim Frenkel                                        Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                               +1-718-236-0183