Thread overview | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
February 18, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Hi. Is anyone working on std.concurrency? I was recently experimenting while reading the concurrency chapter and have got functioning prototype where spawn, receiveOnly and simple message queue is working. I would be more than happy to share it and contribute to std.concurrency generally, if such contribution is needed. Thanks, Igor |
February 19, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Igor Lesik | Hi Igor,
That's great news. Sean Kelly has build a near-complete prototype. He does not have much time at all these days, so I'm sure he'll appreciate your help. I suggest you sync with him so as to avoid duplicate work. Sean?
Andrei
Igor Lesik wrote:
> Hi. Is anyone working on std.concurrency? I was recently experimenting while reading the concurrency chapter and have got functioning prototype where spawn, receiveOnly and simple message queue is working. I would be more than happy to share it and contribute to std.concurrency generally, if such contribution is needed.
>
> Thanks,
> Igor
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-concurrency mailing list
> dmd-concurrency at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-concurrency
|
February 20, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrei Alexandrescu | I have messaging in place, but the module needs some upgrading to look like TDPL describes. I just haven't had time to do it yet. Let me dig up the file and I'll post it.
On Feb 19, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Hi Igor,
>
> That's great news. Sean Kelly has build a near-complete prototype. He does not have much time at all these days, so I'm sure he'll appreciate your help. I suggest you sync with him so as to avoid duplicate work. Sean?
>
> Andrei
>
> Igor Lesik wrote:
>> Hi. Is anyone working on std.concurrency? I was recently experimenting
>> while reading the concurrency chapter and have got functioning prototype
>> where spawn, receiveOnly and simple message queue is working. I would be
>> more than happy to share it and contribute to std.concurrency generally, if
>> such contribution is needed.
>> Thanks,
>> Igor
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|
February 20, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Sean Kelly | Good. Then I?will stop working on it. Andrei, I have a question, if you do not mind.? I understood that?receiveOnly call is?blocking, correct? -Igor ----- Original Message ---- From: Sean Kelly <sean at invisibleduck.org> To: Discuss the concurrency model(s) for D <dmd-concurrency at puremagic.com> Sent: Sat, February 20, 2010 11:47:59 AM Subject: Re: [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency I have messaging in place, but the module needs some upgrading to look like TDPL describes.? I just haven't had time to do it yet.? Let me dig up the file and I'll post it. On Feb 19, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > Hi Igor, > > That's great news. Sean Kelly has build a near-complete prototype. He does not have much time at all these days, so I'm sure he'll appreciate your help. I suggest you sync with him so as to avoid duplicate work. Sean? > > Andrei > > Igor Lesik wrote: >> Hi. Is anyone working on std.concurrency? I was recently experimenting >> while reading the concurrency chapter and have got functioning prototype >> where spawn, receiveOnly and simple message queue is working. I would be >> more than happy to share it and contribute to std.concurrency generally, if >> such contribution is needed. >> Thanks, >> Igor >>? ? ? _______________________________________________ >> 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 |
February 21, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Igor Lesik | 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! > Andrei, I have a question, if you do not mind. I understood that receiveOnly call is blocking, correct? Correct. Andrei |
February 21, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrei Alexandrescu | 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.
|
February 21, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Sean Kelly | Get better soon!
Andrei
Sean Kelly wrote:
> 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
|
February 21, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Sean Kelly | 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. |
February 22, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Igor Lesik | 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 |
February 23, 2010 [dmd-concurrency] std.concurrency | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Sean Kelly | 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 |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation