Okay... I've got a question about weak references
Is it possible for the clear() method to be called by the garbage collector when there is still a strong reference in the system?
I'm specifically concerned about the following scenario:
1. The GC finds no strong reference and decides to clear the weak reference object
2. A context switch occurs and GC stops executing
3. The get() method is called...
iLL
Last Activity: Nov 17 '10, 01:54 AM
Joined: Oct 22 '06
Location:
-
Thread Safty w/ WeakReferences
-
I think I'll give that a shot.
I got it working by blocking threads... But it caused communication to be about 20% slower.
Thanks for the reply. -
Sockets and Synchronization
Okay, so I'm tying to get use to programming with sockets, and I have run into a bit of a snag.
As of now, my program basically works like this:
Server: Listen for a connection
Client: Request a connection
Server: Accept connection
Client: Send message
Client: Wait for response
Server: Processes message
Server: Send response
I want my client to also listen... -
Thanks for your helpLeave a comment:
-
No I don't have it in there.
Should it be there on install? Can I assume that other people will have it?
If not, is it legal to upload it to a server and use that as my soundbank, or is that copyright infringement?Leave a comment:
-
I'm trying to use the default soundbank. Is that only available through the JDK?
Edit: Ignore that. Let me check.Leave a comment:
-
midi synth works with jdk but not jre
Can someone tell me why this code works with "Java\jdk1.6.0_ 07\bin\java.exe " but does not work with "Java\jre1.6.0_ 07\bin\java.exe "
...Code:import javax.sound.midi.*; public class sound { public static void main(String[] args) { try { Synthesizer synthesizer = MidiSystem.getSynthesizer(); synthesizer.open(); synthesizer.getChannels()[0].noteOn(60, -
Thanks ;)
............... ..Leave a comment:
-
I'm still a little confused
If I implement mutual exclusion properly, then do I still need to worry about implementing it this way?
And if I do use this method, do I still need to use locks? And if not, what if two different threads call Invoke at the same time, how does that work? Does some sort of stack keep track of waiting Invoke calls?Leave a comment:
-
Sorry for this but... BumpLeave a comment:
-
Confused about using Invoke in worker threads. - C#
So why is it that we need to use the Invoke method when updating the GUI?
The following is the way we are suppose to update GUI components:
...Code:delegate void textIt(object o); public partial class Form1 : Form { public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); } private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { -
If every thread has access to your FormX class, I don't see why you can't make a method that updates a label. Only one thread can do this at a time.
You can also make a label public. This might be bad though.
You don't need any lock if you are only reading. As for two hot links activating an event at the same time, is that possible?...Leave a comment:
-
I hate to tell you this, but I have no experience with dealing dynamic data exchange.
But let me see of I have this correct.
You have some data coming through the buffer. When the data comes in, it triggers an event. When this event is triggered, some thread will update the label. Is that correct?
And you are using 14 threads so that you can read the data fast enough?...Leave a comment:
-
After taking a little closer look at your code. I don't see how it is hanging. Here we should only worry about race conditions, and there should not be anything hanging on a race condition. Deadlocks and starvations causes hangups. Does it hang up at the same spot every time? Does it work for one or two threads? Or does it not work at all?Leave a comment:
-
I didn't really look to close at your code, but I think you need a global Mutex lock
Example:
...Code:class blah { System.Threading.Mutex mLock; public blah() { mLock = new System.Threading.Mutex } public void method1() { mLock.WaitOne(); // Critical Section mLock.Release(); }Leave a comment:
-
Thanks a lot.
I've learned more in these few posts then I have in the few chapters I've read from my C# bookLeave a comment:
-
Now C# implements destructors, right?
If you set the object variable to null then call GC.Collect() in the destructor, that should take care of things.
So is that by design, or is it just a bug?...Leave a comment:
-
You think so?
I like C++, I just don't like VC++. Microsoft just over complicated it, I find that I spend more time fighting it then getting work done.
Though I like managing my own garbage as any C/C++ programmer, I think it would be a bad idea to start complicating C#.
And I don't usually use .NET being a student, however I think I should learn it myself. I see that most jobs require it.Leave a comment:
-
I don't know if you care, but this is what I gathered since posting this yesterday.
Pointers are unsafe because garbage collection moves data around. It is possible for GC to move data that is currently being pointed to, making a pointer point to unallocated data. To fix this C# has a concept of a fixed pointer. It looks a little like this:
...Code:fixed (int* p1 = &x) { fixed (double* p2 = &y)Leave a comment:
-
C# and pointers
Okay, I'm teaching myself C# and now I have a question about pointers.
When if I declare a new object, do I need to delete it? Or does garbage collection take care of that too. It seems a little odd to declare a peace of code “unsafe” if it's perfectly safe.
If it is possible to manually deallocate, how do I do it?
No activity results to display
Leave a comment: