"Shet, Aniruddha G." wrote on 03/23/2007 09:00:26 AM:
> Hi,
>
> The current X10 compiler does not seem to flag a BadPlaceException when
> a place accesses a mutable array element located on another place. Also,
> updates on the same mutable array element by different activities in
> flight appear to work well without using the atomic option. Is this just
> the state of the current release or am I missing something?
>
> Thanks,
> Aniruddha
Aniruddha,
Yes, the BadPlaceExceptions are turned off by default in the current X10
implementation. You can turn them back on by supplying the
-BAD_PLACE_RUNTIME_CHECK=true to the x10 runtime, but that part of the
code
is fairly unmaintained, so if you run into problems, please let us know.
Updates on the same array element from different places should work
well enough if the array element type is 32-bit (which the Java memory
model
guarantees to be atomic). Once you go to 64-bit values (longs or
doubles),
you will likely run into race conditions. This stems from the fact that
the current prototype compiles to Java.
Igor
--
Igor Peshansky (note the spelling change!)
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
XJ: No More Pain for XML's Gain (http://www.research.ibm.com/xj/)
X10: Parallel Productivity and Performance (http://x10.sf.net/)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
X10-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/x10-users
