From: Ricardo Panaggio <panaggio.ricardo@...>
Date: 2010-07-26T07:18:20+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:31479] Re: [rubysoc] Semaphore implementation

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 22:30, Ricardo Panaggio
<panaggio.ricardo@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This time I was working on Semaphore. It's on my semaphore branch
> (http://github.com/panaggio/ruby/compare/queue...semaphore#files_bucket
> although github is not comparing them correctly =/)
>
> I'd like some feedback on the ruby implementation
> (http://github.com/panaggio/ruby/compare/panaggio:queue...semaphore#diff-3)
> and on the tests
> (http://github.com/panaggio/ruby/compare/panaggio:queue...semaphore#diff-4).
>
> Now I'm solving a lot of annoying bugs (racing conditions are horrible
> to debug and solve =/) and polishing the code, but I know there's need
> to more features, like Semaphore#broadcast and Semaphore#try_wait,
> that I'll implement soon. But I need to know it there's anything more
> missing, or anything that could be just removed (like num_waiting).
>
> I don't think these tests can help me find problems on the code, but I
> couldn't think about anything better. Any insight here you be very
> appreciated.
>
> This feedback will also help me a lot to implement it in C, as I'll
> have a list of features and a direction to go to. I'll continue the C
> implementation as soon as I can have the ruby implementation as a
> reference (just to have something to test against - I'll try to
> implement it in C using as much native code as possible).
>
> There's some C code there (thread*), but it's very raw by now. Caleb
> have told me about a lot of conceptual and implementation mistakes I
> did, specially on thread_win32.c, and I know that there may be a lot
> more. Any advice in here (if possible - I know it's a horrible code by
> now) �will be also appreciated.

Semaphore code is ready, both ruby and C code.

Is there any issue? Any improvements?

Again, should I create a single ticket for both implementations?

As always, thanks a lot for all the help!

>
> Again, thanks in advance for all the help. You all gave me a lot of
> good insights �last time I asked.
>
> Ricardo Panaggio
>
>