RE: [Rubydotnet-developer] rubydotnet - first announcement

[Ben S. <bsc...@pr...>]

Adding to what John wrote ...

> > Have you made any progress on the thread safety issue with=20
> callbacks from
> > .net to ruby? I'm wondering if it is necessary to make some kind of
> > synchronized queue, where you post you callbacks and then=20
> have a pool of
> > ruby threads reading the jobs from that queue as they are=20
> posted. Or maybe
> > we could lobby match to add some locking to ruby to make it=20
> thread-safe? I
> > know too little about this :-)=20
>=20
> Yep!  You are right!  Our socket edition of the bridge=20
> handles this correctly
> and utilizes a message queue concept.  We call the concept=20
> the Post Office in
> our classes in the code. Callbacks are handled and posted on=20
> the correct thread
> in Ruby and/or .NET.  As an aside, we have yet to make our=20
> C++ extension follow
> this same behavior.

If you're interested, the tests in "Ruby/tests/TestRubySideQueueing.rb" =
from our download test the Ruby PostOffice.  Threads send socket =
messages and then call PostOffice#waitForResult; a receiving thread then =
calls #returnResult, #throwException, or #runOnThreadWithId to tell the =
waiting thread what to do next.

There are similar tests on the .NET side at =
"Tests/PostOfficeTesting.cs".  The code has some cosmetic differences =
between the two sides - which might be nice to iron out - but is =
similar.

(Our latest release can be found at =
"http://www.saltypickle.com/rubydotnet/Downloads".)

I'm not sure whether the tests are in great shape for reading - but I'd =
be happy to answer any questions!

Regards,
Ben