Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 1999
At 04:44 PM 8/9/99 +0300, Tuomas J. Lukka wrote:
>Maybe really emphasize the fact that unlike in other languages, you should
>get the lock EVEN IF MANY THREADS ONLY READ THE VARIABLE AND NO-ONE WRITES.
But it's actually safe for lots of threads to read the variable
simultaneously. It's just tough to tell whether an access is a read or
update...
You're right, though. More emphasis is necessary, and a more complete
explanation's probably warranted in the FAQ or something
>Also, I really think that only allowing locks like this is troublesome:
>we should also allow C<unlock>
Just out of curiosity, why? I presume it's unlock in addition to locks
getting released when they fall out of scope. I can see the occasional
need, but I don't know that it'd be used enough to justify the extra
hassles involved.
Dan
----------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
dan@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk