How to avoid deadlock?

[Default User]

Dean Stevens wrote:

Stop raving! Go to a bookstore and pick up the Advanced Programming
in the UNIX Environment before talking about programming.

*plonk*




Brian Rodenborn

 

[Mark McIntyre]

I wanted an experienced C programmer to answer my question. Any
non-trivial C programs have fork, signal, socket, or pthread. I don't
know what C grograms you are talking about?

Probably because you apparently have no clue at all what C is, or what
an expert C programmer is either. Clue: its nothing to do with unix.

What a logic! Not every C programmer processes command-line utilities
like you.

And this relevant how? clue: its not. the topic of CLC is C, not
system specific extensions to C.

Stop raving! Go to a bookstore and pick up the Advanced Programming
in the UNIX Environment before talking about programming.

Read your post. See that word in all-caps? Is that word spelt "C"? No?
Well, then what the fsck has it got to do with C then? Free clue no 3:
all the C world is not a unix box. In fact only a very very small
fraction of it is.

 

[Markus Elfring]

Would you like to use the class library "http://mdthread.org/"
(Message-Driven Thread API for the Java Programming Language)?
The FAQ contains the following statement.
"A major advantage of the mdthread API over Doug Lea's utilities is
that a program based on the mdthread API is automatically
deadlock-safe.
...."

 

[David Schwartz]

Would you like to use the class library "http://mdthread.org/"
(Message-Driven Thread API for the Java Programming Language)?
The FAQ contains the following statement.
"A major advantage of the mdthread API over Doug Lea's utilities is
that a program based on the mdthread API is automatically
deadlock-safe.
..."

What cracks me up the most is their comparison to Win32 UI threads. They
say their implementation is portable because it's "written entirely in
Java". But that means it's portable across platforms but tied to one
language. Win32 UI threads work in any language but aren't protable across
platforms. Whether that makes one more portable than the other is a tricky
question, but it's not a "yes/no" bullet item.

DS

 

[Markus Elfring]

I suggest to read the following documents to see that Java is more
portable because other languages can access its rich functionality,
too.

1. Lesson: Interacting with Java from the Native Side
http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/native1.1/implementing/index.html

2. Scripting Pages in Java Web Applications
http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=223

3. The Tcl/Java Project
http://tcljava.sourceforge.net/