Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cu programmer 
Sujet : Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)
De : 643-408-1753 (at) *nospam* kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku)
Groupes : comp.unix.shell comp.unix.programmer comp.lang.misc
Date : 18. Aug 2024, 18:46:07
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <20240818094145.827@kylheku.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
User-Agent : slrn/pre1.0.4-9 (Linux)
On 2024-08-18, Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
On 2024-08-17 23:51, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 12:58:31 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
 
Windows inter-process API are far more advanced than what UNIX ever had.
It would be enough to mention famous file locks.
 
Except those file locks are more of a liability than an asset.
>
Like so many things in UNIX...
>
They are
what prevent you from continuing to use a Windows system while it is being
updated, for example.
>
Windows mutex gets collected when the last process using it dies. UNIX
file lock does not.

Windows mutexes are mainly useful only for ensuring the dubious feature of
allowing only one instance of an application to run.

If a mutex is actually used to protect shared data against concurrent
access, and the owner dies while holding the mutex, the next thread
to try to grab the mutex must be informed so it can try to recover
the shared data into a sane state.

POSIX process-shared mutexes have this "robust" feature as an option.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca

Date Sujet#  Auteur
10 Nov 24 o 

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal