Talk:Serializing tokens

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Speaking of serialization! I just discovered what happens when two people attempt to modify the same Wiki page at the same time!

--MJA

Yeah, what's that?

Hey, does anyone have any references to criticism of this concurrency model? Anyone in the academia looking into this?

About "Serializing Tokens In Action", I see deadlocks can still happen. So the real difference with mutexes is only the fact that when the thread blocks, the token is released? I think this article is not neutral enough and lacks some counter examination.

JnRouvignac (talk) 07:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you need to use a technique like this, your code is likely poorly designed from a locking perspective. Components should not call out to other components while holding a lock, and a lock should be held only while touching the specific data that is protected by that lock. It seems that if you need this type of lock, you have too much random code acting under your lock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.162.229 (talk) 05:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]