From: Nathan <njmacinnes@...>
Date: 2010-04-07T23:59:18+09:00
Subject: Re: modifying a Hash in one process when .each is running in another

Sorry, that should read "it's source has become unavailable".
Obviously the object itself is still there!!!

On Apr 7, 3:53 pm, Nathan <njmacin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Do you really want generate_list_objects to run 4 times uselessly while
> > the test suite runs the original set of tests?
>
> I think you've misunderstood... sorry if I wasn't clear. Perhaps
> naming the method test was a bad idea. I don't mean test as in unit
> test or whatever, I mean something completely different. If an object
> is no longer on the list returned by generate_list_of_objects, that
> means it has become unavailable, and running test won't accomplish
> anything meaningful. That's why I'm interested in keeping the list as
> up-to-date as possible.
>
> On Apr 7, 3:45 pm, Brian Candler <b.cand...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Nathan Macinnes wrote:
> > > Thanks for the clarification... My application is network based, and
> > > some operations take several seconds. generate_list_of_objects takes
> > > anything between 2 and 15 seconds, so I wouldn't like to have my whole
> > > program on hold while that's happening. Each test process takes a few
> > > seconds too, so if the object is no longer on the list, it isn't a
> > > particularly bad thing if test tries to run, but it'll take up a lot
> > > of time unnecessarily.
>
> > Let's say generate_list_objects takes 15 seconds, and the test suite
> > (iterating the objects) takes 60 seconds. Do you really want
> > generate_list_objects to run 4 times uselessly while the test suite runs
> > the original set of tests?
>
> > Similarly, if the test suite takes 15 seconds and generate_list_objects
> > takes 60 seconds, do you want to run the test suite 4 times identically
> > with the first set of objects?
>
> > If not, but rather you want to run the test suite exactly once for each
> > set of data, then you should synchronize them. How about this
> > (untested):
>
> > require 'thread'
> > cmd = Queue.new
> > res = Queue.new
> > tester = Thread.new do
> >   while myHash = cmd.pop
> >     myHash.each { ... }
> >     res.push [myHash, :ok]
> >   end
> > end
>
> > q.push MyClass.generate_list_of_objects
> > while Time.now < time_to_finish
> >   q.push MyClass.generate_list_of_objects
> >   res.pop
> > end
> > res.pop
> > q.push nil
> > tester.wait
> > --
> > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.