RE: Additional Monitors test cases

"Thong (Tum) Nguyen" <tum-x2aT3/[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnu.dotgnu.developer
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Russell,

I've fixed the bug and committed the test cases (thanks).
Do you still get a problem with Monitor.Wait()?

All the best,

^Tum


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell Stuart [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 4 May 2004 4:40 p.m.
> To: Thong (Tum) Nguyen
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: [DotGNU]Additional Monitors test cases
> 
> I have put up a patch for you to look at.
>   https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/index.php?func=detailitem&item_id=3006
> 
> The patch just adds some more tests for monitors.  I have verified that
> all the tests pass when run under VS.  I wrote the tests originally to
> demonstrate a bug in Monitor.Wait().  They failed miserably at that
> task, but it turns out they do show up a bug in Interrupting
> System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(), so they ended up being good for
> something.  If you agree either apply it yourself, or let me know and I
> will apply it.
> 
> The bug I was trying to demonstrate now think is dammed near impossible
> to demonstrate with a test.  In the current CVS,
>   pnet/support/wait_mutex.c, line 587,
> ILWaitMonitorWait calls ILWaitOne.  ILWaitOne will return
> IL_WAIT_INTERRUPTED if there is an interrupt pending.  At least I think
> so - I can't see anything that would prevent it from doing that.  I am
> fairly sure it should not be possible to interrupt or abort that wait.
> The MS doco is vague on the issue, but the Java docs for java the
> equivalent aren't:
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/lang/Object.html#wait(long)
> 
> The books I have say the C# implementation is meant to mimic the Java
> one.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.