On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 01:38 +0200, Maciej Piechotka wrote:
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 10:55 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
Summary: byte access (read/write) is atomic on
MOST architectures. Dang! I thought ALL.
I'm not sure but there is no guarantee that it is - you don't know it it
will be,
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 09:07 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
Thank you for all the feedback and discussion.
I now realize that my app, which seems to work
perfectly, is a time bomb that would blow
my brain away because I'm using a pipeline
where a finished job is indicated by setting
a flag as
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 08:20 +0200, Jürg Billeter wrote:
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 01:38 +0200, Maciej Piechotka wrote:
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 10:55 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
Summary: byte access (read/write) is atomic on
MOST architectures. Dang! I thought ALL.
I'm not sure but
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 11:51 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
[1] Note that because the libgee deals with pointers it needs to
implement a bit more. If you need a guide see
http://blog.piechotka.com.pl/2014/03/01/lock-free-collection-in-libgee-hazard-pointer/
(even more self-promotion)
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 10:55 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
Summary: byte access (read/write) is atomic on
MOST architectures. Dang! I thought ALL.
I'm not sure but there is no guarantee that it is - you don't know it it
will be, say, in ARMv9. Alpha, while probably not in the top 3 most
popular
Thank you for all the feedback and discussion.
I now realize that my app, which seems to work
perfectly, is a time bomb that would blow
my brain away because I'm using a pipeline
where a finished job is indicated by setting
a flag as the final instruction. Like this:
.
// do stuff
On Jun 14, 2014, at 4:20 PM, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote:
As a side question - why do you need volatile? In most cases it's not
needed (unless you write kernel/driver and do memory based I/O).
I've run into the issue calling functions with side effects. Here is a snippet
2014-06-15 1:20 GMT+02:00 Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com:
On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 16:54 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
Is there any way to declare a volatile?
As a side question - why do you need volatile? In most cases it's not
needed (unless you write kernel/driver and do memory based
As a side question - why do you need volatile? In most cases it's not
needed (unless you write kernel/driver and do memory based I/O).
My multithreaded code didn't work and I thought
may be gcc is making a wrong optimization.
Turns out to be my own fault.
But still, I'm curious, can gcc make
On Sun, 2014-06-15 at 11:39 -0700, Edward Hennessy wrote:
On Jun 14, 2014, at 4:20 PM, Maciej Piechotka
uzytkownik2-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
As a side question - why do you need volatile? In most cases it's not
needed (unless you write kernel/driver and do memory
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 02:29 +0200, Paul Marques Mota wrote:
2014-06-15 1:20 GMT+02:00 Maciej Piechotka
uzytkownik2-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org:
On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 16:54 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
Is there any way to declare a volatile?
As a side question - why do you
/* Need to register types with the glib type system for dynamic
* construction with gtkbuilder. Need to figure out a better way
* to ensure the calls to typeof() are not optimized out.
*/
stdout.printf(Registering %s\n, typeof(AboutDialog).name());
True - there is a few cases where volatile can be used (I know too
little about security to say if using just volatile is ok from standard
POV). I guess you could reformulate my question into - in most you
don't need volatile and many programmers use volatile as atomic despite
it does not
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 09:18 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
True - there is a few cases where volatile can be used (I know too
little about security to say if using just volatile is ok from standard
POV). I guess you could reformulate my question into - in most you
don't need volatile and
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 08:44 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
As a side question - why do you need volatile? In most cases it's not
needed (unless you write kernel/driver and do memory based I/O).
My multithreaded code didn't work and I thought
may be gcc is making a wrong optimization.
Turns
Summary: byte access (read/write) is atomic on
MOST architectures. Dang! I thought ALL.
[1] Synchronized means if x and y are set to 0 and thread 1 sets first x
and then y to 1 then thread 2 might read y == 1 and then x == 0. Atomic
means that state of x and y are either 0 or 1. Note that x86
[1] Note that because the libgee deals with pointers it needs to
implement a bit more. If you need a guide see
http://blog.piechotka.com.pl/2014/03/01/lock-free-collection-in-libgee-hazard-pointer/
(even more self-promotion)
Thanks for the link. That eventually leads me to
ConcurrentList.
On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 16:54 +0800, Nor Jaidi Tuah wrote:
Is there any way to declare a volatile?
Gedit highlighting indicates that it is a keyword in vala.
But trying
volatile int xx;
gives a compiler error.
Nice day
Nor Jaidi Tuah
As a side question - why do you need volatile?
Is there any way to declare a volatile?
Gedit highlighting indicates that it is a keyword in vala.
But trying
volatile int xx;
gives a compiler error.
Nice day
Nor Jaidi Tuah
PRIVILEGED/CONFIDENTIAL information may be contained in this message. If you
are neither the addressee
you can try to create a vapi file with
[SimpleType]
[IntegerType]
[CCode (cname = volatile_int_t, cheader_filename = volatile.h,
has_type_id = false)]
public struct volatile_int_t {
}
and a volatile.h with
typedef volatile int volatile_int_t
2014-06-11 10:54 GMT+02:00 Nor Jaidi Tuah
Hi,
2009/12/28 Nor Jaidi Tuah norjaidi.t...@ubd.edu.bn:
Is volatile supported in Vala?
I think it should.
If so, what's the syntax?
I guess
volatile type identifier;
but it seems not to be working now, someone needs to fix it. (if there
is no bug about this bugzilla, please file one)
HTH,
Is volatile supported in Vala?
If so, what's the syntax?
If not, what's the alternative?
hand
Nor Jaidi Tuah
___
Vala-list mailing list
Vala-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
22 matches
Mail list logo
