Re: Task safe containers? Help needed.

[reinert <reinkor@gmail.com>]

About your first option: Putting the containers in a protected object makes the container functions "private" and not directly available outside the protected object. Right? I like these container functions.

But your other options also somehow complicates :-)

A compromise seems to be necessary :-) Maybe the first option anyway facilitates cleanest code? There must be a reason for the invention of protected types.

reinert

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 8:57:18 AM UTC+2, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> On 2017-10-08 06:27, reinert wrote:
> 
> > if I want to access a container (Vector, Set, Map) by several tasks
> > (updating and reading) - (hopefully) without loosing functionality of
> > the container.
> > 
> > What should I do?
> 
> 1. If operations are short and non-blocking put the container in a 
> protected object and route operations trough object's ones.
> 
> 2. If operations are long, unbounded, blocking (most of the cases):
> 
> 2.a Use a mutex taken at the beginning of each operation and released at 
> the end.
> 
> 2.b Use monitor task owning the container. All operations are performed 
> by the task from task's entries.
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Dmitry A. Kazakov
> http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de