From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Concurrency Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:36:30 -0400 Message-ID: <764D9F6D-CE43-423D-A81B-CB299A1393BC@raeburn.org> References: <27349166.post@talk.nabble.com> <27564728.post@talk.nabble.com> <4B756FB7.3050202@swipnet.se> <87k4ui4gik.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <27566385.post@talk.nabble.com> <87wryi2sjd.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <27585994.post@talk.nabble.com> <87k4ucdmwh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87d3zweq4e.fsf@master.homenet> <87y6hg1h4a.fsf@thor.thematica.it> <87tys3j9fa.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87eij6tqmu.fsf@lifelogs.com> <49707.130.55.132.67.1269807922.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <87oci8rwtw.fsf@gnu.org> <87aatrigux.fsf@thor.thematica.it> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269880758 2595 80.91.229.12 (29 Mar 2010 16:39:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:39:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "emacs-devel@gnu.org discussions" To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 29 18:39:14 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NwHzc-00020R-CB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 18:39:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38665 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NwHzb-0000ll-En for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:39:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NwHxC-0008J9-Mn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:36:42 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54699 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NwHxB-0008Ih-7C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:36:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NwHx9-0008P4-EX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:36:40 -0400 Original-Received: from splat.raeburn.org ([69.25.196.39]:53305 helo=raeburn.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NwHx1-0008Nn-Ns for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:36:39 -0400 Original-Received: from squish.raeburn.org (squish.raeburn.org [10.0.0.172]) by raeburn.org (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o2TGaUL2006262; Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:36:31 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:122853 Archived-At: On Mar 29, 2010, at 12:16, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Also, I think mutex-unlock should throw some kind of error if the mutex >> is owned by a different thread. What do you think of that? > > That doesn't sound useful. There are perfectly valid ways to use mutexes > where the locker and the unlocker are not the same thread. True... but there are models where it would be a bug, plain and simple. Maybe it should be an option to mutex-unlock? Ken