[fpc-pascal] Semaphore problems

Vinzent Höfler JeLlyFish.software at gmx.net
Mon Jul 24 22:09:45 CEST 2006

Micha Nelissen wrote:
> Vinzent Höfler wrote:
>> Currently all I see is a subtle semantic difference between Windows- and
>> Unix-Event's implementation.
> AFAICS, it's as close as it can get. You mean subtle as in, unimportant,
> or as in, possibly fatal ? :-) If possibly fatal, describe when/how.

If used incorrectly, i.e. asynchronously.

>> So for now all I can say is that this should either
>> a) be documented,
> *Could* be a good idea, yes ;-).
>> b) changed to a common semantic behaviour, or
> They're both more or less 'transient' now.

Depends on the view point. Doing two consecutive waits() might do very 
different things. :)

So I'd say, the behaviour and intended use should definitely be documented.

> I am not sure how to emulate windows behavior on unix, although that
> behavior is easier to use I think, so would be desirable.

You'd have to create an own abstraction about the useful primitives. 
That's what I was initially talking about. :) Dunno, if that's good for 
the RTL, because you'd probably loose /some/ speed on the way...


More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list