Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 09:09:09 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <v9ur2l$2pdrg$1@dont-email.me>
References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <20240408075547.000061e8@gmail.com>
 <g52cnWOOwoz_son7nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <uvbe3m$2cun7$1@dont-email.me> <uvbfii$3mom0$1@news.xmission.com>
 <20240412094809.811@kylheku.com> <87il0mm94y.fsf@tudado.org>
 <way-20240413091747@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <87il0lldf8.fsf@tudado.org>
 <choices-20240413123957@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <v9lm2k$12qhv$1@dont-email.me> <v9m4gd$14scu$1@dont-email.me>
 <20240815182717.189@kylheku.com> <v9npls$1fjus$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9posc$1rpdj$1@dont-email.me> <v9pvoo$1sn55$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9r60h$2289h$2@dont-email.me> <v9sa91$2afht$1@dont-email.me>
 <20240818094145.827@kylheku.com> <v9tdg7$2flkf$2@dont-email.me>
 <20240818215317.300@kylheku.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 09:09:09 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7f0f8cffd5f8b7dd36dcbeaaba75ce11";
	logging-data="2930544"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18d5J/7G3R6w/ZNWz7zJKz6XOhB3OtME7w="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Jc4GQToYdGtoYneAw4LHpjDNYv8=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <20240818215317.300@kylheku.com>
Bytes: 2602

On 2024-08-19 06:54, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2024-08-18, Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
>> On 2024-08-18 18:46, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>
>>> If a mutex is actually used to protect shared data against concurrent
>>> access, and the owner dies while holding the mutex, the next thread
>>> to try to grab the mutex must be informed so it can try to recover
>>> the shared data into a sane state.
>>
>> There is no recovery if a protected operation crashes, because the state
>> of the object is unknown.
> 
> That is false; the object's state can be analyzed and repaired.

The object must be designed in a special way in order to support roll 
backs etc. Such techniques exclude concurrent access, e.g. memory is 
never overwritten etc.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de