[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Minor Correction?

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 18 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 18 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

> >>>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:45:05 -0600, "Mark K. Gardner" <mkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> > Shouldn't the definition of thread-terminate! state that threads
> > which are not the current thread should terminate immediately?
> >> If thread is not running or it is the current thread, it is
> >>                                  ^not
> >> terminated immediately, otherwise the scheduler may wait until the
> >> thread blocks or is preempted before terminating it.
> Nope.  If a thread calls thread-terminate! then it can (and according
> to the spec, must) terminate immediately.  Likewise for not-running
> threads.  But running threads other than the caller of
> thread-terminate! may run until they block or are preempted.

I agree with Dave.  Note that this leaway for other threads is
purely to simplify implementation on multiprocessors.

Should I be more precise and specify that the primitive
thread-terminate! does not wait until the thread has been terminated
before returning?  Note that a program can force to wait for thread
termination by following the call to thread-terminate! with a call to
thread-join! with appropriate exception handling.