On 5/29/22 13:53, Christian Köstlin wrote:

> According to
> https://www.schveiguy.com/blog/2022/05/comparing-exceptions-and-errors-in-d/ 

> its bad to catch Errors ...

Correct in the sense that the program should not continue after catching Error.

> so dowork should catch only Exception?

It should catch Error as well. Otherwise you will have no idea why a thread disappeared. You may agree with me here:

  https://youtu.be/dRORNQIB2wA?t=1950

I catch'ed Throwable in the code just because it's a quick little experiment.

> it might be better
> to crash directly ...

Sounds good but only after leaving the reason behind somehow.

Ali

On 5/29/22 13:47, Christian Köstlin wrote:

> Our discussion with using TLS for the
> collectors proposed to not need any lock on the add method for
> collector, because its thread local and with that thread safe?

It would be great that way but then the client changed the requirements on us:

On 5/26/22 12:54, Christian Köstlin wrote:
> I want to be able to dump tracings even while the program is still running.

:p

If the collected data were TLS, then the dumping thread should be able to ask each thread to provide data collected so far. That either requires synchronization, which I did, which necessitated shared Collector objects; or messaging, which would require each thread checking their Concurrency message box.

I don't know...

A third option came to me: Each thread periodically puts their data to a common location and dumper dumps whatever is aggregated up to that point. This would reduce contention.

Ali