Bryan O'Sullivan b...@serpentine.com writes:
The question is a simple one. Must all operations on a TVar happen
within *the same* atomically block, or am I am I guaranteed thread
safety if, say, I have a number of atomically blocks in an IO
function.
If you want successive operations to see
On 01/14/2012 03:55 PM, Ketil Malde wrote:
Bryan O'Sullivanb...@serpentine.com writes:
The question is a simple one. Must all operations on a TVar happen
within *the same* atomically block, or am I am I guaranteed thread
safety if, say, I have a number of atomically blocks in an IO
function.
On 14 January 2012 18:05, Steffen Schuldenzucker
sschuldenzuc...@uni-bonn.de wrote:
I think consistent state here means that you can be sure no other thread
has modified a, say, TVar, within the current 'atomically' block.
OK, well take a modified example, where I am wanting to call an IO
On 14 January 2012 19:24, Rob Stewart robstewar...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 14 January 2012 18:05, Steffen Schuldenzucker
sschuldenzuc...@uni-bonn.de wrote:
I think consistent state here means that you can be sure no other thread
has modified a, say, TVar, within the current 'atomically'
On 1/14/12 2:24 PM, Rob Stewart wrote:
Are IO functions permissible in STM atomically blocks?
They are not. The semantics of STM are that each transaction is retried
until it succeeds, and that the number of times it is retried does not
affect the program output. Thus, you can only do things
Hi,
My question is regarding the correct us of STM in Haskell. I have put
to together a simple example, which represents more verbose code in a
library that I am writing.
The question is a simple one. Must all operations on a TVar happen
within *the same* atomically block, or am I am I
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Rob Stewart
robstewar...@googlemail.comwrote:
The question is a simple one. Must all operations on a TVar happen
within *the same* atomically block, or am I am I guaranteed thread
safety if, say, I have a number of atomically blocks in an IO
function.
If
