[Cuis-dev] Follow-up: #terminate and #suspend update
Juan Vuletich
juan at cuis.st
Fri Feb 24 02:49:47 PST 2023
Hi Jaromir,
Thank you for your continued help with this tricky area of the system!
I've just integrated your changes. Just a couple of comments:
- Any update to comments is of course welcome. Thanks!
- Not sure why you removed the `push: nil` in #unwindAndStop:, but I
trust you know what you are doing here.
Cheers,
On 2/7/2023 5:49 PM, Jaromir Matas via Cuis-dev wrote:
>
> Hi Juan,
>
> I’m enclosing a version (002) further improving the previous changeset
> (001), for your review/merge with the following changes:
>
> 1) placed "suspendedContext _ nil" assignment as close to the #suspend
> message as possible
>
> 2) improved readability (I hope)
>
> If you’re ok with it I’ll refine outdated comments. It passes all
> Process and Exception tests in both Cuis and Squeak.
>
> Thanks for your time and any comments.
>
> Best,
>
> --
>
> *Jaromír Matas*
>
> mail at jaromir.net
>
> *From: *Juan Vuletich <mailto:juan at cuis.st>
> *Sent: *Monday, January 30, 2023 20:57
> *To: *Discussion of Cuis Smalltalk <mailto:cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st>
> *Cc: *Jaromir Matas <mailto:mail at jaromir.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [Cuis-dev] Follow-up: #terminate and #suspend update
>
> Hi Jaromir,
>
> Thank you very much for this.
>
> Unfortunately, I'll be out of town for a few days, and I think it
> could be a bit risky if I push these changes, and then I'm not
> available to help address any issues that could occur.
>
> I promise I'll review and integrate your contributions as usual, when
> back in town. Thanks for your patience.
>
> Cheers,
>
> On 1/30/2023 10:20 AM, Jaromir Matas via Cuis-dev wrote:
>
> Hi Juan,
>
> I’m enclosing a modified #terminate that would fix the two failing
> tests, plus some more Semaphore tests further exploring the
> semantics during unwinds, and a fix of a small bug in
> #unwindAndStop:. All tested and green even in in Squeak :)
>
> Best,
>
> Jaromir
>
> --
>
> *Jaromír Matas*
>
> mail at jaromir.net <mailto:mail at jaromir.net>
>
> *From: *Juan Vuletich <mailto:juan at cuis.st>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 24, 2023 19:49
> *To: *Discussion of Cuis Smalltalk <mailto:cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st>
> *Cc: *Jaromir Matas <mailto:mail at jaromir.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [Cuis-dev] Follow-up: #terminate and #suspend update
>
> Hi Jaromir,
>
> Just pushed these to github, together with #expectedFailures.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On 1/23/2023 4:30 PM, Jaromir Matas via Cuis-dev wrote:
>
> Hi Juan,
>
> Thanks again. I’m enclosing the two tests I’d like to store
> for future reference.
>
> They both illustrate system’s behavior when you attempt to
> resume or terminate a process that is being terminated and the
> termination procedure is in a vulnerable early stage:
> specifically when the terminating suspended context/stack is
> being prepared, before running the “proper” unwind. In this
> particular situation the termination may derail. The
> probability of such an event is reasonably low but why not fix
> it. A possible solution is commented in the tests but before
> integrating it I want to test it thoroughly in Squeak/Pharo as
> well. The idea is to nil the suspended context during the
> preparation of the new stack to prevent accidental
> resumption/termination. Once the “proper” unwind starts it’s
> ok to terminate the terminating process again as demonstrated
> in # testTerminateTerminatingProcessAfterUnwindStarted
>
> Best,
>
> Jaromir
>
> --
>
> *Jaromír Matas*
>
> mail at jaromir.net <mailto:mail at jaromir.net>
>
> *From: *Juan Vuletich via Cuis-dev <mailto:cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st>
> *Sent: *Monday, January 23, 2023 15:25
> *To: *Discussion of Cuis Smalltalk <mailto:cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st>
> *Cc: *Juan Vuletich <mailto:juan at cuis.st>; Jaromir Matas
> <mailto:mail at jaromir.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [Cuis-dev] Follow-up: #terminate and #suspend
> update
>
> Hi!
>
> On 1/22/2023 4:29 PM, Jaromir Matas via Cuis-dev wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> Missed the list, sorry.
>
> As we agree to keep the current isTerminated semantics
> (also consistent with Squeak/Pharo) I’d suggest to use the
> test as the documentation of the observed behavior; I’ve
> added a link to the archive in the comment.
>
>
> Just pushed it to github.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Question: is there a way to make a test an “expected
> failure” like in Squeak? In Squeak I create a method
>
> ProcessTest>>#expectedFailures
>
> ^ #(testTerminateTerminatingProcess
> testResumeTerminatingProcess)
>
> As a result the two listed tests show green in the test
> runner if they fail.
>
> If possible, I’d like to post two tests that currently
> fail as a reminder/documentation.
>
>
> Plase post those tests. If nobody beats to me, I'll add
> expected failure functionality.
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jaromir
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> --
>
> Juan Vuletich
>
> cuis.st
>
> github.com/jvuletich
>
> researchgate.net/profile/Juan-Vuletich
>
> independent.academia.edu/JuanVuletich
>
> patents.justia.com/inventor/juan-manuel-vuletich
>
> linkedin.com/in/juan-vuletich-75611b3
>
> twitter.com/JuanVuletich
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Juan Vuletich
>
> cuis.st
>
> github.com/jvuletich
>
> researchgate.net/profile/Juan-Vuletich
>
> independent.academia.edu/JuanVuletich
>
> patents.justia.com/inventor/juan-manuel-vuletich
>
> linkedin.com/in/juan-vuletich-75611b3
>
> twitter.com/JuanVuletich
>
>
>
>
> --
> Juan Vuletich
> cuis.st
> github.com/jvuletich
> researchgate.net/profile/Juan-Vuletich
> independent.academia.edu/JuanVuletich
> patents.justia.com/inventor/juan-manuel-vuletich
> linkedin.com/in/juan-vuletich-75611b3
> twitter.com/JuanVuletich
>
--
Juan Vuletich
cuis.st
github.com/jvuletich
researchgate.net/profile/Juan-Vuletich
independent.academia.edu/JuanVuletich
patents.justia.com/inventor/juan-manuel-vuletich
linkedin.com/in/juan-vuletich-75611b3
twitter.com/JuanVuletich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20230224/20a7eff1/attachment.htm>
More information about the Cuis-dev
mailing list