Thread: [tcljava-dev] aolserver support patch
Brought to you by:
mdejong
From: Dan W. <dcw...@ea...> - 2001-01-06 06:17:40
Attachments:
diffs.txt
|
Mo, I would like to apply the attached patch to the tclblend source to add support for aolserver. Let me know if it's ok. -Dan |
From: Mo D. <md...@cy...> - 2001-01-29 00:18:08
|
On Sat, 6 Jan 2001, Dan Wickstrom wrote: > Mo, > > I would like to apply the attached patch to the tclblend source to add > support for aolserver. Let me know if it's ok. > > -Dan In looking at this patch, I am a bit bothered by the fact that you moved the ThreadSpecificData struct from javaCmd.c to java.h. I was under the impression that Tcl needed to have this struct defined only in the .c file and not the .h file. This is so that it can be defined as different ways for different files. It seems you worked around this merging the TSD data, but I am not sure that it really "right". Will it break some other code that might need to #include java.h? I am not sure exactly what you want to do with the data ptr returned by JavaGetDataKey, can it be cast to a void * so that code outside of javaCmd.c does not need to know the type of the TSD ptr? Also, why do you not call Interp.dispose() when compiled with -DWITH_AOLSERVER ? A comment about why that bit was compiled out might be good. I assume it has something to do with this do_cleanup flag. I am a little fuzzy on what that is needed for. Also, why did you change the calls in JavaInterpDeleted? Does adding that tid variable in Java_tcl_lang_Notifier_init and Java_tcl_lang_Notifier_alertNotifier get rid of a compiler warning or something? Mo DeJong Red Hat Inc |
From: Daniel W. <da...@rt...> - 2001-01-29 17:51:00
|
>>>>> "Mo" == Mo DeJong <md...@cy...> writes: Mo> On Sat, 6 Jan 2001, Dan Wickstrom wrote: >> Mo, >> >> I would like to apply the attached patch to the tclblend source >> to add support for aolserver. Let me know if it's ok. >> >> -Dan Mo> In looking at this patch, I am a bit bothered by the fact that Mo> you moved the ThreadSpecificData struct from javaCmd.c to Mo> java.h. I was under the impression that Tcl needed to have Mo> this struct defined only in the .c file and not the .h Mo> file. This is so that it can be defined as different ways for Mo> different files. It seems you worked around this merging the Mo> TSD data, but I am not sure that it really "right". Will it Mo> break some other code that might need to #include java.h? Typically the TSD (thread-specific-data) structure is limited to "file" scope. That way you can have multiple TSD structures (one-per-file) that are isolated from each other. I have taken the two TSD structures that previously existed and combined them into a single TSD structure which is accessible with global scope throughout the tclblend sources. If you included java.h in a file that already had its own TSD structure defined, then there would be a problem. The way I have it setup now, you would need to add new variables to the existing TSD structure rather than creating a separate TSD structure as I did when I modified the notifier to be multi-threaded. Mo> I am not sure exactly what you want to do with the data ptr Mo> returned by JavaGetDataKey, can it be cast to a void * so that Mo> code outside of javaCmd.c does not need to know the type of Mo> the TSD ptr? I use JavaGetDataKey to get the TSD data key when I'm accessing the TSD structure from the aolserver specific code. Yes, I should be able to change it to return a void pointer. Mo> Also, why do you not call Interp.dispose() when compiled with Mo> -DWITH_AOLSERVER ? A comment about why that bit was compiled Mo> out might be good. I assume it has something to do with this Mo> do_cleanup flag. I am a little fuzzy on what that is needed Mo> for. Mo> Also, why did you change the calls in JavaInterpDeleted? Aolserver disposes of the interpreter automatically, so it is not necessary to explicitly dispose of the interpreter in aolserver. Having the dispose call caused the server to crash. Mo> Does Mo> adding that tid variable in Java_tcl_lang_Notifier_init and Mo> Java_tcl_lang_Notifier_alertNotifier get rid of a compiler Mo> warning or something? Yes, that was done to get rid of a compiler warning. |
From: Daniel W. <da...@rt...> - 2001-02-07 17:58:03
|
Mo, So what did you decide on this patch? I sent you a response to your questions, but I never heard anything back. -Dan |
From: Mo D. <md...@cy...> - 2001-02-07 19:49:28
|
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Daniel Wickstrom wrote: > > Mo, > > So what did you decide on this patch? I sent you a response to your > questions, but I never heard anything back. > > -Dan I remember we had talked about some changes to the patch that would make it more acceptable, did you want to implement those? I suppose I could code them up but I am not going to have any free time until after the end of this month. Mo |
From: Daniel W. <da...@rt...> - 2001-02-07 19:57:23
|
>>>>> "Mo" == Mo DeJong <md...@cy...> writes: Mo> On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Daniel Wickstrom wrote: >> Mo, >> >> So what did you decide on this patch? I sent you a response to >> your questions, but I never heard anything back. >> >> -Dan Mo> I remember we had talked about some changes to the patch that Mo> would make it more acceptable, did you want to implement Mo> those? I suppose I could code them up but I am not going to Mo> have any free time until after the end of this month. I must have misunderstood, as I don't remember agreeing on any changes to the patch. You asked some questions, and I responded but I didn't think we agreed to anything. I there are going to be changes to the patch, I would rather do it myself, so I can make sure that the aolserver side works. -Dan |