From: Tom Felker <tcfelker@...>
Date: 2003-06-04T05:06:44+09:00
Subject: Re: thread-unsafe stuff: could you summarize?

On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 03:24, Robert Klemme wrote:
> 
> First, accesses to @deferRunning should be done synchronized. But: Why do
> you introduce @deferRunning when you have already a Mutex? You can do
> try_lock and locked? on a Mutex thread safe but without blocking the
> current thread.

Looking back, I can't remember why I even have that.  If you remove all
reference to @deferRunning, it'll work the way I want.

> And: I have the feeling that in defer() a "not" is missing.  Shouldn't it
> read
> 
> def defer
>   if not @deferRunning
> ....
>   else
> ....
>   end
> end

Well, it did work, but you're right, @deferRunning is pointless.  Code
always looks different when you look at it a week later.  :-)

I guess my question is, is it OK to pass blocks between threads like
this?  Also, am I doing the right thing with making it both a module and
a class?

-- 
Tom Felker

38% of statistics are made up on the spot.