On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:36 PM, erik quanstrom
<quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> > > Apple's using it all over the place in Snow Leopard, in all their native
> > > apps to write cleaner, less manual-lock code. At least, that's the claim
> > > :-).
> >
> > could someone explain this to me? i'm just missing how
> > naming a block of code could change its locking properties.
> >
> >
> The explanation is in the manual I linked to earlier in this discussion. If
> you want to see examples there's two I can think of available for download.
> One is called DispatchLife the other is DispatchFractal.
>
> I've looked at DispatchLife, and there's no explicit locking of state for
> every cell being concurrently update in Conway's game of life.
i can't find DispatchLife after a few minutes of googling.
i've read the manual, and it looks like csp to me. clearly
i am a reprobate outside the apple reality distortion field.
Google doesn't have all the answers, I actually had to use Bing today, and it worked... anyway here's the link to DispatchLife.
could you explain why this isn't csp and why this can't be done
with regular c (that is why we need the concept of an
unnamed function pointer) and the thread library?
I'm actually planning to figure this stuff out a bit more and "blog" about it, hopefully by Friday sometime (tomorrow).
I don't agree that any of this stuff is strictly needed. One can plod along with pthreads and do it wrong all day. One doesn't *need* C either, I've seen whole OSes for x86 written in assembly.
It all depends on how much crap you want to keep track of.
Dave
- erik