[dmd-concurrency] draft 5

[Robert Jacques]

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:24:40 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<andrei at erdani.com> wrote:

> Robert Jacques wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:27:29 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu  
>> <andrei at erdani.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Robert Jacques wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 01:36:10 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu  
>>>> <andrei at erdani.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Kevin Bealer wrote:
>>>>>> So the caller calls setMaxMailboxSize with a callee's Tid.  Then  
>>>>>> that caller will not send messages unless the callee's mailbox is  
>>>>>> smaller than that amount?
>>>>>>  Will all callers obey the limit, or should they each set their own  
>>>>>> limit?  If the latter, then the design is as I thought.
>>>>>
>>>>> Each thread has a mailbox. That mailbox has a capacity. That  
>>>>> capacity can be set from any thread. It's that simple.
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei
>>>>  Bike shed but, what about: tid.capacity = N; ?
>>>
>>> Yah but sometimes one needs to also set the contingency action  
>>> atomically.
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>  I was actually think capacity would be a property and therefore  
>> support atomicity.
>
> I mean: you want to set capacity _and_ contingency action in one atomic  
> unit.
>
> Andrei

You're right. I forgot about the contingency action. Still, member  
functions generally are nicer than free functions.