From: "Vishnu I." <pathsny@...>
Date: 2011-01-06T19:49:34+09:00
Subject: Re: Threading in ruby

> Yes.  But there is no additional synchronization needed for access to
> the Array or Hash instances in the array.  It is sufficient to only
> update the index in a synchronized block.  And in fact that is the
> only operation that you should do there (apart from the condition
> variable signal).
>
> The term "memory barrier" is a concept from the JVM.  AFAIK in Ruby's
> MRI there is no concept as thread local and global memory (which the
> memory barriers update).  Second, a memory barrier effects *all the
> memory*.  Whatever changes were done before it are then propagated to
> between memories (in JVM of course).
>
> Does that help?
>
> Kind regards
>
> robert

oops Im sorry I wasnt clear. My question was why would I need to 
synchronize on the read of the index variable if the synchronized write 
has created a memory barrier between the updation of the list item and 
the index update? Thats the only piece i couldnt follow

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.