Re: [Repast-developer] Is the Schedule class "re-entrant"?

[Nick C. <nic...@ve...>]

I think what you say here will be OK as long as any actions added in
preExecute do not schedule actions for the current tick. 

Nick

On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 16:45, Andy Cleary wrote:
> My apologies ahead of time for being rusty enough that I'm not sure I'm 
> using the correct term (re-entrant) nor that I'm not asking an obvious 
> question one way or the other...
> 
> I am trying to extend/modify (I'm cheating: I'm extending the class, but 
> I'm extending it by copying the source of the method that I want to change 
> and then changing it... I'm not exactly sure where that sits in the OO 
> pantheon but it's probably not a good idea in general as a rewrite of the 
> parent class would now invalidate my extension) the Schedule stuff in 
> Repast to test some ideas we are working on. I'm modifying the method 
> "preExecute" in ScheduleBase: just before the routine ends, I make a method 
> call on another object. Now, here's the trick: somewhere in the processing 
> of that other method call, the flow of control may come *back* to the 
> current Schedule and try to add events, albeit *after* the current tick. 
> Like I said, my mind is drawing a blank, but I'm calling that "re-entrant", 
> in the sense that I don't think such a thing was anticipated by the 
> original developers. I've tried to follow the source enough to determine 
> whether that should be "safe", that is, would the addition of events to the 
> schedule be ok in the state that the schedule is in just before "pre 
> execute" ends? It's a little like a threading question but I'm only 
> assuming a single thread of control here.
> 
> It *looks* safe, because basically what preExecute does is set aside a set 
> of actions to be performed during "execute", and changes to the priority 
> queue once that is done should not effect that set, and the existence of 
> that set shouldn't effect the state of the priority queue. However, I 
> thought I'd check in with the development team to find out for sure...
> 
> Thanks,
> Andy
> 
> ============================================
> Andrew J. Cleary, Software Engineer/Computational Scientist
> Lawrence Livermore National Labs, 925-424-5890.
> ============================================
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU
> Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner.
> Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission!
> INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php
> _______________________________________________
> Repast-developer mailing list
> Rep...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/repast-developer
-- 
Nick Collier <nic...@ve...>