> On 05 Jan 2016, at 13:23, Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 2016-01-05 12:59 GMT+01:00 Max Leske <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>: > You may have a point there. Although the monitor uses a Semaphore > #forMutualExclusion, which is a semaphore with one signal. So the case where > the semaphore gets signalled without #wait is less likely I think. > > No. It has no relation to incorrect scenarios of semaphore signalling. > #forMutualExclusion just make semaphore free to use. So first caller of #wait > will grab lock. And others will wait. > Two times signalled semaphore will allow two critical sections be performed > simultaneously which should not happen
True >
