synchronized (this[.classinfo]) in druntime and phobos

[Andrew Wiley]

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:13 PM, deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com> wrote:

> Le 04/06/2012 02:03, Andrew Wiley a écrit :
>
>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM, deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com
>>
>> <mailto:deadalnix at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>    Le 03/06/2012 21:40, Andrew Wiley a écrit :
>>
>>        On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com
>>        <mailto:deadalnix at gmail.com>
>>        <mailto:deadalnix at gmail.com <mailto:deadalnix at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>
>>            Le 01/06/2012 22:55, Sean Kelly a écrit :
>>
>>                On Jun 1, 2012, at 5:26 AM, deadalnix wrote:
>>
>>
>>                    The main drawback is the same as opApply : return (and
>>                    break/continue but it is less relevant for
>>        opSynchronized).
>>                    Solution to this problem have been proposed in the past
>>                    using compiler and stack magic.
>>
>>                    It open door for stuff like :
>>                    ReadWriteLock rw;
>>                    synchronized(rw.read) {
>>
>>                    }
>>
>>                    synchronized(rw.write) {
>>
>>                    }
>>
>>
>>                Opens the door?  This works today exactly as outlined
>>        above.  Or
>>                am I missing a part of your argument?
>>
>>                    And many types of lock : spin lock, interprocesses
>>        locks,
>>                    semaphores, . . . And all can be used with the
>>        synchronized
>>                    syntax, and without exposing locking and unlocking
>>        primitives.
>>
>>
>>                All works today.
>>
>>
>>            Unless you do some monitor magic, it doesn't.
>>
>>        Yes, it does.
>>        -----
>>        class Something {
>>             private:
>>                 ReadWriteLock _rw;
>>             public:
>>                 this() {
>>                     _rw = new ReadWriteLock();
>>                 }
>>                 void doSomething() shared {
>>                     synchronized(_rw.read) {
>>                         // do things
>>                     }
>>                 }
>>        }
>>        -----
>>        I've used this pattern in code. There might be some casting
>> required
>>        because the core synchronization primitives haven't been updated
>>        to use
>>        shared yet.
>>
>>
>>    And where is that ReadWriteLock ?
>>
>> On the GC heap, just like the Monitor object pointed to by __monitor if
>> you mark a method or class as synchronized.
>>
>
> I meant where is the code ?
>

My apologies, it's actually ReadWriteMutex:
http://dlang.org/phobos/core_sync_rwmutex.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20120603/e55e3cdf/attachment.html>