[dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency

[Sean Kelly]

I don't see any whitespace in that link.  Any way to correct that?

The current version of my code doesn't have any dynamic allocation in thisTid(), perhaps you grabbed an intermediate version?  I did update it a few times shortly after sending the email.

On Feb 23, 2010, at 5:00 AM, Igor Lesik wrote:

> I tried your code with removed dynamic allocation on thisTid(), Tid is "alias TID* Tid" where TID is the structure. Interesting that "delete tid" where tid is returned from spawn or thisTid does not actually destroy the structure and thisTid returns correct address, so there is nothing to be afraid of. Do I miss something?
> 
> Here is my version:
> http://www.curoles.com/j/concurrency.d
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Sean Kelly <sean at invisibleduck.org>
> To: Discuss the concurrency model(s) for D <dmd-concurrency at puremagic.com>
> Sent: Mon, February 22, 2010 11:40:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency
> 
> Here's the module:
> 
> http://www.invisibleduck.org/sean/src/concurrency.d
> 
> It just has send and receive so far, but those are tested and work correctly.  For the moment, Tid is a struct and Cid doesn't exist.  I'd like to try and keep Tid and Cid as structs if possible to avoid the need for dynamic allocation when thisTid() is called (using a single shared Tid instance isn't really safe since it could be deleted by the user).  Most importantly, this still doesn't work:
> 
>     receive( (int a) {}, (string b) {} );
> 
> The compiler still "sticks" on the type of the first delegate in the foreach expansion and errors during compilation.  Once this is fixed I'll add checking for overload conflicts in the receive set, etc.
> 
> On Feb 21, 2010, at 1:43 PM, Igor Lesik wrote:
> 
>> Sean, just in case, I put my stuff here:
>> http://www.curoles.com/j/dstdconcur.html
>> 
>> Get better.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Sean Kelly <sean at invisibleduck.org>
>> To: Discuss the concurrency model(s) for D <dmd-concurrency at puremagic.com>
>> Sent: Sun, February 21, 2010 1:19:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency
>> 
>> On Feb 21, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> 
>>> Igor Lesik wrote:
>>>> Good. Then I will stop working on it.
>>> 
>>> Just until you coordinate with Sean. I'm sure your contribution would add a lot of value. Also, don't forget - new ideas are always appreciated!
>> 
>> Definitely.  I've been out sick recently but will be back in commission tomorrow.  I'll try and shape up the module then.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmd-concurrency mailing list
>> dmd-concurrency at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-concurrency
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-concurrency mailing list
> dmd-concurrency at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-concurrency
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-concurrency mailing list
> dmd-concurrency at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-concurrency