[ViewVC] Diff of: cvs/Coro/Coro.pm

Comparing Coro/Coro.pm (file contents):
Revision 1.307 by root, Fri Nov 11 20:22:08 2011 UTC vs.
Revision 1.346 by root, Fri Jul 14 23:20:07 2017 UTC

    async {
       Coro::terminate "return value 1", "return value 2";
    };
-And yet another way is to C<< ->cancel >> (or C<< ->safe_cancel >>) the
+Yet another way is to C<< ->cancel >> (or C<< ->safe_cancel >>) the coro
-coro thread from another thread:
+thread from another thread:
    my $coro = async {
       exit 1;
    };
 So, cancelling a thread that runs in an XS event loop might not be the
 best idea, but any other combination that deals with perl only (cancelling
 when a thread is in a C<tie> method or an C<AUTOLOAD> for example) is
 safe.
-Lastly, a coro thread object that isn't referenced is C<< ->cancel >>'ed
+Last not least, a coro thread object that isn't referenced is C<<
-automatically - just like other objects in Perl. This is not such a common
+->cancel >>'ed automatically - just like other objects in Perl. This
-case, however - a running thread is referencedy b C<$Coro::current>, a
+is not such a common case, however - a running thread is referencedy by
-thread ready to run is referenced by the ready queue, a thread waiting
+C<$Coro::current>, a thread ready to run is referenced by the ready queue,
-on a lock or semaphore is referenced by being in some wait list and so
+a thread waiting on a lock or semaphore is referenced by being in some
-on. But a thread that isn't in any of those queues gets cancelled:
+wait list and so on. But a thread that isn't in any of those queues gets
+cancelled:
    async {
       schedule; # cede to other coros, don't go into the ready queue
    };
    cede;
    # now the async above is destroyed, as it is not referenced by anything.
+A slightly embellished example might make it clearer:
+   async {
+      my $guard = Guard::guard { print "destroyed\n" };
+      schedule while 1;
+   };
+   cede;
+Superficially one might not expect any output - since the C<async>
+implements an endless loop, the C<$guard> will not be cleaned up. However,
+since the thread object returned by C<async> is not stored anywhere, the
+thread is initially referenced because it is in the ready queue, when it
+runs it is referenced by C<$Coro::current>, but when it calls C<schedule>,
+it gets C<cancel>ed causing the guard object to be destroyed (see the next
+section), and printing it's message.
+If this seems a bit drastic, remember that this only happens when nothing
+references the thread anymore, which means there is no way to further
+execute it, ever. The only options at this point are leaking the thread,
+or cleaning it up, which brings us to...
 =item 5. Cleanup
 Threads will allocate various resources. Most but not all will be returned
 when a thread terminates, during clean-up.
    my $sem = new Coro::Semaphore;
    async {
       my $lock_guard = $sem->guard;
-      # if we reutrn, or die or get cancelled, here,
+      # if we return, or die or get cancelled, here,
       # then the semaphore will be "up"ed.
    };
 The C<Guard::guard> function comes in handy for any custom cleanup you
-might want to do (but you cannot switch to other coroutines form those
+might want to do (but you cannot switch to other coroutines from those
 code blocks):
    async {
       my $window = new Gtk2::Window "toplevel";
       # The window will not be cleaned up automatically, even when $window
 =item 6. Viva La Zombie Muerte
 Even after a thread has terminated and cleaned up its resources, the Coro
 object still is there and stores the return values of the thread.
-The means the Coro object gets freed automatically when the thread has
+When there are no other references, it will simply be cleaned up and
-terminated and cleaned up and there arenot other references.
+freed.
-If there are, the Coro object will stay around, and you can call C<<
+If there areany references, the Coro object will stay around, and you
-->join >> as many times as you wish to retrieve the result values:
+can call C<< ->join >> as many times as you wish to retrieve the result
+values:
    async {
       print "hi\n";
       1
    };
 our $idle;    # idle handler
 our $main;    # main coro
 our $current; # current coro
-our $VERSION = 6.07;
+our $VERSION = 6.513;
 our @EXPORT = qw(async async_pool cede schedule terminate current unblock_sub rouse_cb rouse_wait);
 our %EXPORT_TAGS = (
       prio => [qw(PRIO_MAX PRIO_HIGH PRIO_NORMAL PRIO_LOW PRIO_IDLE PRIO_MIN)],
 );
 =over 4
 =item $Coro::main
 This variable stores the Coro object that represents the main
-program. While you cna C<ready> it and do most other things you can do to
+program. While you can C<ready> it and do most other things you can do to
 coro, it is mainly useful to compare again C<$Coro::current>, to see
 whether you are running in the main program or not.
 =cut
 C<async> does. As the coro is being reused, stuff like C<on_destroy>
 will not work in the expected way, unless you call terminate or cancel,
 which somehow defeats the purpose of pooling (but is fine in the
 exceptional case).
-The priority will be reset to C<0> after each run, tracing will be
+The priority will be reset to C<0> after each run, all C<swap_sv> calls
-disabled, the description will be reset and the default output filehandle
+will be undone, tracing will be disabled, the description will be reset
-gets restored, so you can change all these. Otherwise the coro will
+and the default output filehandle gets restored, so you can change all
-be re-used "as-is": most notably if you change other per-coro global
+these. Otherwise the coro will be re-used "as-is": most notably if you
-stuff such as C<$/> you I<must needs> revert that change, which is most
+change other per-coro global stuff such as C<$/> you I<must needs> revert
-simply done by using local as in: C<< local $/ >>.
+that change, which is most simply done by using local as in: C<< local $/
+>>.
 The idle pool size is limited to C<8> idle coros (this can be
 adjusted by changing $Coro::POOL_SIZE), but there can be as many non-idle
 coros as required.
       # at this place, the timezone is Antarctica/South_Pole,
       # without disturbing the TZ of any other coro.
    };
 This can be used to localise about any resource (locale, uid, current
-working directory etc.) to a block, despite the existance of other
+working directory etc.) to a block, despite the existence of other
 coros.
 Another interesting example implements time-sliced multitasking using
 interval timers (this could obviously be optimised, but does the job):
       Coro::on_enter {
          # on entering the thread, we set an VTALRM handler to cede
          $SIG{VTALRM} = sub { cede };
          # and then start the interval timer
          Time::HiRes::setitimer &Time::HiRes::ITIMER_VIRTUAL, 0.01, 0.01;
       };
       Coro::on_leave {
          # on leaving the thread, we stop the interval timer again
          Time::HiRes::setitimer &Time::HiRes::ITIMER_VIRTUAL, 0, 0;
       };
       &{+shift};
    }
    # use like this:
    timeslice {
       # The following is an endless loop that would normally
       # monopolise the process. Since it runs in a timesliced
       # environment, it will regularly cede to other threads.
       while () { }
    };
 =item killall
 Kills/terminates/cancels all coros except the currently running one.
 =item $state->is_new
 Returns true iff this Coro object is "new", i.e. has never been run
 yet. Those states basically consist of only the code reference to call and
 the arguments, but consumes very little other resources. New states will
-automatically get assigned a perl interpreter when they are transfered to.
+automatically get assigned a perl interpreter when they are transferred to.
 =item $state->is_zombie
 Returns true iff the Coro object has been cancelled, i.e.
 it's resources freed because they were C<cancel>'ed, C<terminate>'d,
 the thread is inside a C callback that doesn't expect to be canceled,
 bad things can happen, or if the cancelled thread insists on running
 complicated cleanup handlers that rely on its thread context, things will
 not work.
-Any cleanup code being run (e.g. from C<guard> blocks) will be run without
+Any cleanup code being run (e.g. from C<guard> blocks, destructors and so
-a thread context, and is not allowed to switch to other threads. On the
+on) will be run without a thread context, and is not allowed to switch
+to other threads. A common mistake is to call C<< ->cancel >> from a
+destructor called by die'ing inside the thread to be cancelled for
+example.
-plus side, C<< ->cancel >> will always clean up the thread, no matter
+On the plus side, C<< ->cancel >> will always clean up the thread, no
-what.  If your cleanup code is complex or you want to avoid cancelling a
+matter what.  If your cleanup code is complex or you want to avoid
-C-thread that doesn't know how to clean up itself, it can be better to C<<
+cancelling a C-thread that doesn't know how to clean up itself, it can be
-->throw >> an exception, or use C<< ->safe_cancel >>.
+better to C<< ->throw >> an exception, or use C<< ->safe_cancel >>.
 The arguments to C<< ->cancel >> are not copied, but instead will
 be referenced directly (e.g. if you pass C<$var> and after the call
 change that variable, then you might change the return values passed to
 e.g. C<join>, so don't do that).
 =item $coro->safe_cancel ($arg...)
 Works mostly like C<< ->cancel >>, but is inherently "safer", and
 consequently, can fail with an exception in cases the thread is not in a
-cancellable state.
+cancellable state. Essentially, C<< ->safe_cancel >> is a C<< ->cancel >>
+with extra checks before canceling.
-This method works a bit like throwing an exception that cannot be caught
+It works a bit like throwing an exception that cannot be caught -
-- specifically, it will clean up the thread from within itself, so
+specifically, it will clean up the thread from within itself, so all
-all cleanup handlers (e.g. C<guard> blocks) are run with full thread
+cleanup handlers (e.g. C<guard> blocks) are run with full thread
 context and can block if they wish. The downside is that there is no
 guarantee that the thread can be cancelled when you call this method, and
 therefore, it might fail. It is also considerably slower than C<cancel> or
 C<terminate>.
 that is, after it's resources have been freed but before it is joined. The
 callback gets passed the terminate/cancel arguments, if any, and I<must
 not> die, under any circumstances.
 There can be any number of C<on_destroy> callbacks per coro, and there is
-no way currently to remove a callback once added.
+currently no way to remove a callback once added.
 =item $oldprio = $coro->prio ($newprio)
 Sets (or gets, if the argument is missing) the priority of the
 coro thread. Higher priority coro get run before lower priority
 coro thread. This is just a free-form string you can associate with a
 coro.
 This method simply sets the C<< $coro->{desc} >> member to the given
 string. You can modify this member directly if you wish, and in fact, this
-is often preferred to indicate major processing states that cna then be
+is often preferred to indicate major processing states that can then be
 seen for example in a L<Coro::Debug> session:
    sub my_long_function {
       local $Coro::current->{desc} = "now in my_long_function";
       ...
 otherwise you might suffer from crashes or worse. The only event library
 currently known that is safe to use without C<unblock_sub> is L<EV> (but
 you might still run into deadlocks if all event loops are blocked).
 Coro will try to catch you when you block in the event loop
-("FATAL:$Coro::IDLE blocked itself"), but this is just best effort and
+("FATAL: $Coro::idle blocked itself"), but this is just best effort and
 only works when you do not run your own event loop.
 This function allows your callbacks to block by executing them in another
 coro where it is safe to block. One example where blocking is handy
 is when you use the L<Coro::AIO|Coro::AIO> functions to save results to
 It is very common for a coro to wait for some callback to be
 called. This occurs naturally when you use coro in an otherwise
 event-based program, or when you use event-based libraries.
 These typically register a callback for some event, and call that callback
-when the event occured. In a coro, however, you typically want to
+when the event occurred. In a coro, however, you typically want to
 just wait for the event, simplyifying things.
 For example C<< AnyEvent->child >> registers a callback to be called when
 a specific child has exited:
 But from within a coro, you often just want to write this:
    my $status = wait_for_child $pid;
 Coro offers two functions specifically designed to make this easy,
-C<Coro::rouse_cb> and C<Coro::rouse_wait>.
+C<rouse_cb> and C<rouse_wait>.
 The first function, C<rouse_cb>, generates and returns a callback that,
 when invoked, will save its arguments and notify the coro that
 created the callback.
 function mentioned above:
    sub wait_for_child($) {
       my ($pid) = @_;
-      my $watcher = AnyEvent->child (pid => $pid, cb => Coro::rouse_cb);
+      my $watcher = AnyEvent->child (pid => $pid, cb => rouse_cb);
-      my ($rpid, $rstatus) = Coro::rouse_wait;
+      my ($rpid, $rstatus) = rouse_wait;
       $rstatus
    }
 In the case where C<rouse_cb> and C<rouse_wait> are not flexible enough,
-you can roll your own, using C<schedule>:
+you can roll your own, using C<schedule> and C<ready>:
    sub wait_for_child($) {
       my ($pid) = @_;
       # store the current coro in $current,
       my ($done, $rstatus);
       # pass a closure to ->child
       my $watcher = AnyEvent->child (pid => $pid, cb => sub {
          $rstatus = $_[1]; # remember rstatus
-         $done = 1; # mark $rstatus as valud
+         $done = 1;        # mark $rstatus as valid
+         $current->ready;  # wake up the waiting thread
       });
       # wait until the closure has been called
       schedule while !$done;
 processes. What makes it so bad is that on non-windows platforms, you can
 actually take advantage of custom hardware for this purpose (as evidenced
 by the forks module, which gives you the (i-) threads API, just much
 faster).
-Sharing data is in the i-threads model is done by transfering data
+Sharing data is in the i-threads model is done by transferring data
 structures between threads using copying semantics, which is very slow -
 shared data simply does not exist. Benchmarks using i-threads which are
 communication-intensive show extremely bad behaviour with i-threads (in
 fact, so bad that Coro, which cannot take direct advantage of multiple
 CPUs, is often orders of magnitude faster because it shares data using
 XS API: L<Coro::MakeMaker>.
 Low level Configuration, Thread Environment, Continuations: L<Coro::State>.
-=head1 AUTHOR
+=head1 AUTHOR/SUPPORT/CONTACT
- Marc Lehmann <schmorp@schmorp.de>
+   Marc A. Lehmann <schmorp@schmorp.de>
- http://home.schmorp.de/
+   http://software.schmorp.de/pkg/Coro.html
 =cut

Diff Legend

-–
+Removed lines
-+
+Added lines
-<
+Changed lines
->
+Changed lines

Comparing Coro/Coro.pm (file contents): Revision 1.307 by root, Fri Nov 11 20:22:08 2011 UTC vs. Revision 1.346 by root, Fri Jul 14 23:20:07 2017 UTC

Diff Legend

Comparing Coro/Coro.pm (file contents):
Revision 1.307 by root, Fri Nov 11 20:22:08 2011 UTC vs.
Revision 1.346 by root, Fri Jul 14 23:20:07 2017 UTC