Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #113575 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-10-30 08:12 +0100 |
| Last post | 2023-11-05 15:30 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 151 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-10-30 08:12 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-10-30 13:08 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-10-31 13:25 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> - 2023-10-31 17:37 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-10-31 13:59 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 13:00 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 19:24 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 19:28 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-01 19:04 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 20:11 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 13:02 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 13:36 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:13 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 00:19 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:13 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-04 15:53 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 16:58 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 11:44 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-09 01:05 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-04 16:03 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 11:45 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 11:48 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 19:58 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 12:14 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 13:01 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 07:10 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-01 20:50 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 14:05 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 14:07 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-11-03 16:04 +0200
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:24 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:14 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 12:58 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 07:10 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-02 14:58 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-02 16:34 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 16:46 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 13:12 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-03 10:13 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:16 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-08 20:33 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 16:44 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-02 16:02 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-11-03 16:10 +0200
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 21:05 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-05 04:23 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-02 15:37 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 16:48 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-02 16:00 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 17:26 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-03 10:15 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 11:55 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-03 14:41 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:22 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-03 16:35 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 16:49 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-03 18:02 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 18:08 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-03 17:29 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-03 18:52 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:21 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-04 17:22 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 17:35 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-04 17:56 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 18:18 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-03 18:51 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:20 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-03 17:28 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 18:30 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-03 18:03 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 19:07 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 19:08 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:26 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-03 18:54 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 20:25 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-03 20:56 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:15 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-04 16:05 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 17:35 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-04 18:44 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:19 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:16 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:25 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 12:42 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 05:33 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 05:35 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 12:11 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-05 22:54 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 18:49 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-06 02:58 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-03 15:32 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-11-03 18:05 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-11-03 16:53 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 18:09 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:25 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:17 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 12:44 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 05:36 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-05 17:25 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 18:55 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 12:12 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 12:18 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-05 22:55 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 18:53 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 04:44 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 20:10 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 05:16 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-08 20:44 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-06 04:22 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 05:37 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 21:01 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 21:00 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 09:36 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 12:11 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 23:52 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-07 11:51 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 05:15 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 21:02 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 21:05 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 09:37 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 12:13 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 23:53 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-06 23:00 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-07 05:36 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-07 05:29 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-07 09:38 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-07 11:53 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-09 05:49 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-08 20:52 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-09 05:54 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-08 20:57 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-08 20:45 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-11-05 20:53 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 12:13 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:24 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 15:18 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:18 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 12:45 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-02 13:18 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 13:21 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 12:59 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 00:01 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:19 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:53 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 12:51 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 12:53 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 12:54 -0700
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 12:15 -0800
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> - 2023-11-03 21:18 +0000
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 10:29 +0100
Re: Run this under Windows and Linux Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com> - 2023-11-05 15:30 +0000
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-03 15:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ui3rko$2vc30$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117515 |
On 11/3/2023 8:49 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 03.11.2023 um 16:35 schrieb David Brown: > >> And using the definitions held by most people involved (including the >> C++ standard library, the Windows API, and AFAIK POSIX), mutexes have >> ownership and semaphores do not. ... > > Mutexes only have ownership if they're recursive. WHAT!!! ? ;^o Otherwise you > can easily unlock a mutex which was locked in another thread. > >> A semaphore is not a lock, ... > > It can be used as a lock although it is not recommended because > a semaphore is usually a pure kernel facility. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-04 10:16 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui524s$3a606$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117537 |
Am 03.11.2023 um 23:19 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > On 11/3/2023 8:49 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Am 03.11.2023 um 16:35 schrieb David Brown: >> >>> And using the definitions held by most people involved (including the >>> C++ standard library, the Windows API, and AFAIK POSIX), mutexes have >>> ownership and semaphores do not. ... >> >> Mutexes only have ownership if they're recursive. > > WHAT!!! ? ;^o It't the surrounding code that "knows" that it is an owner, not the mutex itself. A non-recurive mutex just knows that it is owned, but not by whom.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-04 10:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui52m2$3a606$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117537 |
Am 03.11.2023 um 23:19 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > On 11/3/2023 8:49 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Am 03.11.2023 um 16:35 schrieb David Brown: >> >>> And using the definitions held by most people involved (including the >>> C++ standard library, the Windows API, and AFAIK POSIX), mutexes have >>> ownership and semaphores do not. ... >> >> Mutexes only have ownership if they're recursive. > > WHAT!!! ? ;^o It's not necessary to record ownership of a specific thread for a non recursive mutex but just _that_ a mutex is ownend, and not by whom. The benaphore can easily locked in one thread and unlocked in another thread, although this usually doesn't happen. It's just the surrounding code that successfully locked a mutex that "knows" it is the owner. > Otherwise you >> can easily unlock a mutex which was locked in another thread. >> >>> A semaphore is not a lock, ... >> >> It can be used as a lock although it is not recommended because >> a semaphore is usually a pure kernel facility. >> >> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-04 12:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ui66rq$3haup$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117552 |
On 11/4/2023 2:25 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 03.11.2023 um 23:19 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: >> On 11/3/2023 8:49 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Am 03.11.2023 um 16:35 schrieb David Brown: >>> >>>> And using the definitions held by most people involved (including >>>> the C++ standard library, the Windows API, and AFAIK POSIX), mutexes >>>> have ownership and semaphores do not. ... >>> >>> Mutexes only have ownership if they're recursive. >> >> WHAT!!! ? ;^o > > It's not necessary to record ownership of a specific thread for a non > recursive mutex but just _that_ a mutex is ownend, and not by whom. > The benaphore can easily locked in one thread and unlocked in another > thread, although this usually doesn't happen. > It's just the surrounding code that successfully locked a mutex that > "knows" it is the owner. The surrounding code is the mutex. It can use a kernel semaphore for slow paths. You seem to be radically confused. > >> Otherwise you >>> can easily unlock a mutex which was locked in another thread. >>> >>>> A semaphore is not a lock, ... >>> >>> It can be used as a lock although it is not recommended because >>> a semaphore is usually a pure kernel facility. >>> >>> >> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 05:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui75u7$3qqe2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117570 |
Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > The surrounding code is the mutex. ... You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 05:35 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui762c$3qrgt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117570 |
Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > The surrounding code is the mutex. ... You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 12:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ui8stj$4c78$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117579 |
On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > >> The surrounding code is the mutex. ... > > You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates > on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex. Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic. Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me? A semaphore does not have a concept of ownership. However, a mutex does.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 22:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20231105144458.539@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #117600 |
On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: >> >>> The surrounding code is the mutex. ... >> >> You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates >> on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex. > > Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be > used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what > thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic. > Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me? It's like someone paid to misunderstand ... only minus any actual money. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 18:49 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ui9k80$7a3q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117608 |
On 11/5/2023 2:54 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: >>> >>>> The surrounding code is the mutex. ... >>> >>> You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates >>> on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex. >> >> Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be >> used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what >> thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic. >> Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me? > > It's like someone paid to misunderstand ... only minus any actual money. > Humm... Interesting comment! Almost hard to disagree with wrt the, Bontia...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-06 02:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20231105185312.670@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #117610 |
On 2023-11-06, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/5/2023 2:54 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>> Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: >>>> >>>>> The surrounding code is the mutex. ... >>>> >>>> You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates >>>> on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex. >>> >>> Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be >>> used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what >>> thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic. >>> Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me? >> >> It's like someone paid to misunderstand ... only minus any actual money. > > Humm... Interesting comment! Almost hard to disagree with wrt the, Bontia... It's a variation on a quote from Upton Sinclair, evidently found in _I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked_ [1935] "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-03 15:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20231103082409.123@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #117506 |
On 2023-11-03, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > Am 03.11.2023 um 10:15 schrieb David Brown: >> On 02/11/2023 17:26, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Am 02.11.2023 um 17:00 schrieb Kaz Kylheku: >>> >>>> Locked isn't necessarily owned. >>>> The semaphore does not record the ID of an owner. >>> >>> A non-recursive mutes also doesn't do this. The surrounding >>> code itself is designed in a way that it behaves like an owner. >> >> Mutexes - recursive or non-recursive - /do/ record their owner when the >> lock is taken. ... > > Absolutely not. You can take ownership of a mutex in one thread and > release it in another thread. Not POSIX mutexes: pthread_mutex_unlock by a non-owner is either undefined behavior, or a condition diagnosed by an error return value, depending on the mutex attributes: See the table here: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/pthread_mutex_lock.html E.g. for a norma mutex type which is not attributed as robust, it is undefined behavior. Support for unlocking by a non-owner is possible in a mutex, but that's a non-mutex-like behavioral extension. A mutex that is owned by a process, rather than a thread, can be locked by one thread and unlocked by another. Classic POSIX file locks (F_SETLK code of fcntl, etc) are like this, IIRC. That's still mutex-like, just the scope is process, rather than thread. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-03 18:05 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui399g$2s0sv$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117513 |
On 03/11/2023 16:32, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2023-11-03, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> Am 03.11.2023 um 10:15 schrieb David Brown: >>> On 02/11/2023 17:26, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>> Am 02.11.2023 um 17:00 schrieb Kaz Kylheku: >>>> >>>>> Locked isn't necessarily owned. >>>>> The semaphore does not record the ID of an owner. >>>> >>>> A non-recursive mutes also doesn't do this. The surrounding >>>> code itself is designed in a way that it behaves like an owner. >>> >>> Mutexes - recursive or non-recursive - /do/ record their owner when the >>> lock is taken. ... >> >> Absolutely not. You can take ownership of a mutex in one thread and >> release it in another thread. > > Not POSIX mutexes: pthread_mutex_unlock by a non-owner is either > undefined behavior, or a condition diagnosed by an error return value, > depending on the mutex attributes: > > See the table here: > > https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/pthread_mutex_lock.html > > E.g. for a norma mutex type which is not attributed as robust, > it is undefined behavior. > > Support for unlocking by a non-owner is possible in a mutex, but that's > a non-mutex-like behavioral extension. > > A mutex that is owned by a process, rather than a thread, can be locked > by one thread and unlocked by another. Classic POSIX file locks (F_SETLK > code of fcntl, etc) are like this, IIRC. That's still mutex-like, just > the scope is process, rather than thread. > Mutexes are locks, but not all locks are mutexes. File locks are not mutexes - they are for controlling access to files, and it might (rarely) make sense to unlock them from a different thread than the locking thread.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-03 16:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kA91N.279085$8fO.263728@fx15.iad> |
| In reply to | #117506 |
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes: >Am 03.11.2023 um 10:15 schrieb David Brown: >> On 02/11/2023 17:26, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Am 02.11.2023 um 17:00 schrieb Kaz Kylheku: >>> >>>> Locked isn't necessarily owned. >>>> The semaphore does not record the ID of an owner. >>> >>> A non-recursive mutes also doesn't do this. The surrounding >>> code itself is designed in a way that it behaves like an owner. >> >> Mutexes - recursive or non-recursive - /do/ record their owner when the >> lock is taken. ... > >Absolutely not. You can take ownership of a mutex in one thread and >release it in another thread. That has to be the worst idea you've proposed so far.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-03 18:09 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui39gf$2s28j$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117516 |
Am 03.11.2023 um 17:53 schrieb Scott Lurndal: > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes: >> Am 03.11.2023 um 10:15 schrieb David Brown: >>> On 02/11/2023 17:26, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>> Am 02.11.2023 um 17:00 schrieb Kaz Kylheku: >>>> >>>>> Locked isn't necessarily owned. >>>>> The semaphore does not record the ID of an owner. >>>> >>>> A non-recursive mutes also doesn't do this. The surrounding >>>> code itself is designed in a way that it behaves like an owner. >>> >>> Mutexes - recursive or non-recursive - /do/ record their owner when the >>> lock is taken. ... >> >> Absolutely not. You can take ownership of a mutex in one thread and >> release it in another thread. > > That has to be the worst idea you've proposed so far. I won't say that this is recommendable but just that it is possible from the way how a mutex usually works. I just wanted to say with that that mutexes usually have no ownership. You can see that with the benapohre.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-03 15:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ui3s05$2vc30$10@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117520 |
On 11/3/2023 10:09 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 03.11.2023 um 17:53 schrieb Scott Lurndal: >> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes: >>> Am 03.11.2023 um 10:15 schrieb David Brown: >>>> On 02/11/2023 17:26, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>>> Am 02.11.2023 um 17:00 schrieb Kaz Kylheku: >>>>> >>>>>> Locked isn't necessarily owned. >>>>>> The semaphore does not record the ID of an owner. >>>>> >>>>> A non-recursive mutes also doesn't do this. The surrounding >>>>> code itself is designed in a way that it behaves like an owner. >>>> >>>> Mutexes - recursive or non-recursive - /do/ record their owner when the >>>> lock is taken. ... >>> >>> Absolutely not. You can take ownership of a mutex in one thread and >>> release it in another thread. >> >> That has to be the worst idea you've proposed so far. > > I won't say that this is recommendable but just that it is possible > from the way how a mutex usually works. I just wanted to say with > that that mutexes usually have no ownership. You can see that with > the benapohre. > Oh shit. You have dug yourself into a really deep hole here, Bonita. wow.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-04 10:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui526u$3a606$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117541 |
Am 03.11.2023 um 23:25 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > On 11/3/2023 10:09 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> I won't say that this is recommendable but just that it is possible >> from the way how a mutex usually works. I just wanted to say with >> that that mutexes usually have no ownership. You can see that with >> the benapohre. > Oh shit. You have dug yourself into a really deep hole here, Bonita. The benaphore does know that it is owned, but not by whom. Its the surrounding code that knows that it owns the mutex.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-04 12:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ui66u7$3haup$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117549 |
On 11/4/2023 2:17 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 03.11.2023 um 23:25 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > >> On 11/3/2023 10:09 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: > >>> I won't say that this is recommendable but just that it is possible >>> from the way how a mutex usually works. I just wanted to say with >>> that that mutexes usually have no ownership. You can see that with >>> the benapohre. > >> Oh shit. You have dug yourself into a really deep hole here, Bonita. > > The benaphore does know that it is owned, but not by whom. > Its the surrounding code that knows that it owns the mutex. Oh god. The benaphore is a semaphore. Mutex logic using a semaphore for a slow path is different than a semaphore. God damn, man... You are confused and/or trolling? Humm...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 05:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui7653$3qrgt$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #117571 |
Am 04.11.2023 um 20:44 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > Oh god. The benaphore is a semaphore. ... It's a mutex; google for "benaphore mutex -semaphore" and you'll see a lot of people telling the same like me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 17:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20231105092225.760@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #117580 |
On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same > like me. Bandwagon Fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-11-05 18:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ui8ktg$379h$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #117596 |
Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku: > On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same >> like me. > > Bandwagon Fallacy > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web