On 14 November 2013 10:15, Stephan Eggermont wrote:
> Reading this code, made me wonder what operations are actually atomic.
> Anyone having a good explanation?
>
> Stephan
>
> AtomicQueueItem>makeCircular
> "Make a receiver circular, i.e. point to itself,
> answer the old value o
On 14 nov. 2013, at 12:38, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> You should look in VM code clement / eliot can reply more precisely
> but the idea is to see when do you accept to suspend a computation.
> In Smalltlak this is after each message.
Except for #== and inlined message like #ifTrue:ifFalse: , #
Clement also told me that the VM only checked for Cmd-. breaks on back
jumps.
Phil
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:16 AM, jtuc...@objektfabrik.de <
jtuc...@objektfabrik.de> wrote:
> Hi Norbert,
>
> I couldn't have said it any better. For me, this also was interesting,
> because I first thought: "Hec
You should look in VM code clement / eliot can reply more precisely
but the idea is to see when do you accept to suspend a computation.
In Smalltlak this is after each message.
Stef
> Stef,
>
> Am 14.11.2013 um 12:10 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse :
>
>> Note that it would be good to have a special
Stef,
Am 14.11.2013 um 12:10 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse :
> Note that it would be good to have a special syntactic construct for that
> because now
> we rely on the way the compiler works to ensure such properties and it means
> that
> an accessor and a direct access are not semantically equals.
Note that it would be good to have a special syntactic construct for that
because now
we rely on the way the compiler works to ensure such properties and it means
that
an accessor and a direct access are not semantically equals.
Stef
>> On 14 Nov 2013, at 10:15, Stephan Eggermont wrote:
>>
Am 14.11.13 11:19, schrieb Norbert Hartl:
Am 14.11.2013 um 11:16 schrieb jtuc...@objektfabrik.de:
Hi Norbert,
I couldn't have said it any better. For me, this also was interesting, because I first
thought: "Heck, how would I make anything atomic anyways?".
And that question still stands: is t
Marcus wrote:
>-> no message send
>-> no back jump bytecode
>
>therefore it can not be interrupted and process switches can not happen
>between the statements.
Ok, that’s not too difficult.
Thank you
Stephan
Am 14.11.2013 um 11:16 schrieb jtuc...@objektfabrik.de:
> Hi Norbert,
>
> I couldn't have said it any better. For me, this also was interesting,
> because I first thought: "Heck, how would I make anything atomic anyways?".
> And that question still stands: is there a way to make something atomi
Hi Norbert,
I couldn't have said it any better. For me, this also was interesting,
because I first thought: "Heck, how would I make anything atomic anyways?".
And that question still stands: is there a way to make something atomic
that includes message sends? I guess #critical is not the soluti
Am 14.11.2013 um 10:25 schrieb Marcus Denker :
>
> On 14 Nov 2013, at 10:15, Stephan Eggermont wrote:
>
>> Reading this code, made me wonder what operations are actually atomic.
>> Anyone having a good explanation?
>>
>> Stephan
>>
>> AtomicQueueItem>makeCircular
>> "Make a receiver cir
On 14 Nov 2013, at 10:15, Stephan Eggermont wrote:
> Reading this code, made me wonder what operations are actually atomic.
> Anyone having a good explanation?
>
> Stephan
>
> AtomicQueueItem>makeCircular
> "Make a receiver circular, i.e. point to itself,
> answer the old value of
Reading this code, made me wonder what operations are actually atomic.
Anyone having a good explanation?
Stephan
AtomicQueueItem>makeCircular
"Make a receiver circular, i.e. point to itself,
answer the old value of next variable.
Note, this operation should be atomic"
13 matches
Mail list logo
