Argh. Stupid GMail sent it prematurely.
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Michael van der Gulik
<[email protected]>wrote:
>
> If, for example, you were trying to allocate an array of arrays
> concurrently, then I would write (using my namespaces :-) ):
>
> array := Concurrent.Collections.Array new: 1000000000. " We ignore the cost
> of making this array to begin with :-) "
> array withIndexdo: [ :each :i |
> " each will always be nil. "
> array at: i put: (Array new: 10).
> ].
>
> Concurrent.Collections.Array>>withIndexDo: aBlock
> | nThreads sema |
> nThreads := 1000. " Pull this from a system setting or something. "
> sema := Semaphore withSignals: 0-nThreads. " Needs implementing: signal
> it -1000 times (or -999 or -1001? Unsure) "
> 1 to: nThreads do: [ :i |
> [ (nThreads*i) to: (nThreads*i - 1) do: [ :j
> aBlock value: (self at: j) value: j ]
>
sema signal.
> ] fork ].
>
sema wait.
> ^ self.
>
>
Again, it probably won't just run without some bug fixing. And it won't work
on non-closure Squeak anyway.
Gulik.
--
http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
