[reactive] Re: black hole detection and concurrency
conal at conal.net
Tue Jan 6 20:06:31 EST 2009
I don't know if the bug would explain <<loop>>. My guess is that the
black-hole-detection code is incorrectly concluding there is a black hole
because a thunk was marked as in the process of being evaluated, then the
evaluating thread is killed without unmarking the thunk, and then another
thread needs the whnf. This is a fairly naive guess. I don't know this
machinery well enough to have confidence.
What do you think?
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Conal Elliott wrote:
>> Indeed -- many thanks to Bertram, Sterling, Peter & others for the help!
>> I think getting this bug fixed will solve Reactive's mysterious bugs and
>> unblock its progress.
> Ok, we can fix the fairly simple bug that a thread created in blocked mode
> blocks throwTos after the thread has finished. But I'm slightly suspicious
> of the <<loop>> results you were getting - does this bug explain those too?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users