Search Results

Search found 3625 results on 145 pages for 'family safety'.

Page 13/145 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • Controllers and threads

    - by user72185
    Hi, I'm seeing this code in a project and I wonder if it is safe to do: (ASP.NET MVC 2.0) class MyController { void ActionResult SomeAction() { System.Threading.Thread newThread = new System.Threading.Thread(AsyncFunc); newThread.Start(); } void AsyncFunc() { string someString = HttpContext.Request.UrlReferrer.Authority + Url.Action("Index", new { controller = "AnotherAction" } ); } } Is the controller reused, possibly changing the content of HttpContext.Request and Url, or is this fine (except for not using the thread pool). Thanks for info!

    Read the article

  • Writing re-entrant lexer with Flex

    - by Viet
    I'm newbie to flex. I'm trying to write a simple re-entrant lexer/scanner with flex. The lexer definition goes below. I get stuck with compilation errors as shown below (yyg issue): reentrant.l: /* Definitions */ digit [0-9] letter [a-zA-Z] alphanum [a-zA-Z0-9] identifier [a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]+ integer [0-9]+ natural [0-9]*[1-9][0-9]* decimal ([0-9]+\.|\.[0-9]+|[0-9]+\.[0-9]+) %{ #include <stdio.h> #define ECHO fwrite(yytext, yyleng, 1, yyout) int totalNums = 0; %} %option reentrant %option prefix="simpleit_" %% ^(.*)\r?\n printf("%d\t%s", yylineno++, yytext); %% /* Routines */ int yywrap(yyscan_t yyscanner) { return 1; } int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { yyscan_t yyscanner; if(argc < 2) { printf("Usage: %s fileName\n", argv[0]); return -1; } yyin = fopen(argv[1], "rb"); yylex(yyscanner); return 0; } Compilation errors: vietlq@mylappie:~/Desktop/parsers/reentrant$ gcc lex.simpleit_.c reentrant.l: In function ‘main’: reentrant.l:44: error: ‘yyg’ undeclared (first use in this function) reentrant.l:44: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once reentrant.l:44: error: for each function it appears in.)

    Read the article

  • C# - Which is more efficient and thread safe? static or instant classes?

    - by Soni Ali
    Consider the following two scenarios: //Data Contract public class MyValue { } Scenario 1: Using a static helper class. public class Broker { private string[] _userRoles; public Broker(string[] userRoles) { this._userRoles = userRoles; } public MyValue[] GetValues() { return BrokerHelper.GetValues(this._userRoles); } } static class BrokerHelper { static Dictionary<string, MyValue> _values = new Dictionary<string, MyValue>(); public static MyValue[] GetValues(string[] rolesAllowed) { return FilterForRoles(_values, rolesAllowed); } } Scenario 2: Using an instance class. public class Broker { private BrokerService _service; public Broker(params string[] userRoles) { this._service = new BrokerService(userRoles); } public MyValue[] GetValues() { return _service.GetValues(); } } class BrokerService { private Dictionary<string, MyValue> _values; private string[] _userRoles; public BrokerService(string[] userRoles) { this._userRoles = userRoles; this._values = new Dictionary<string, MyValue>(); } public MyValue[] GetValues() { return FilterForRoles(_values, _userRoles); } } Which of the [Broker] scenarios will scale best if used in a web environment with about 100 different roles and over a thousand users. NOTE: Feel free to sugest any alternative approach.

    Read the article

  • Atomic Instructions and Variable Update visibility

    - by dsimcha
    On most common platforms (the most important being x86; I understand that some platforms have extremely difficult memory models that provide almost no guarantees useful for multithreading, but I don't care about rare counter-examples), is the following code safe? Thread 1: someVariable = doStuff(); atomicSet(stuffDoneFlag, 1); Thread 2: while(!atomicRead(stuffDoneFlag)) {} // Wait for stuffDoneFlag to be set. doMoreStuff(someVariable); Assuming standard, reasonable implementations of atomic ops: Is Thread 1's assignment to someVariable guaranteed to complete before atomicSet() is called? Is Thread 2 guaranteed to see the assignment to someVariable before calling doMoreStuff() provided it reads stuffDoneFlag atomically? Edits: The implementation of atomic ops I'm using contains the x86 LOCK instruction in each operation, if that helps. Assume stuffDoneFlag is properly cleared somehow. How isn't important. This is a very simplified example. I created it this way so that you wouldn't have to understand the whole context of the problem to answer it. I know it's not efficient.

    Read the article

  • Using EnterCriticalSection in Thread to update VCL label

    - by user257188
    I'm new to threads. I'm using a 3rd party library that uses threads which at times call a procedure I've provided. How do I update update a TLabel.Caption from my procedure when its called by the thread? If I've called InitializeCriticalSection elsewhere, is it as simple as EnterCriticalSection(CritSect); GlobalVariable := 'New TLabel.Caption'; LeaveCriticalSection(CritSect); And then in my main thread: EnterCriticalSection(CritSect); Label1.Caption:= 'New TLable.Caption'; LeaveCriticalSection(CritSect); But, how do I get the main thread code to be called? The thread can use SendMessage? Or is there some better/easier way (.OnIdle could check a flag set by the thread?) Thanks.

    Read the article

  • java share data between thread

    - by ayush
    i have a java process that reads data from a socket server. Thus i have a BufferedReader and a PrintWriter object corresponding to that socket. Now in the same java process i have a multithreaded java server that accepts client connections. I want to achieve a functionality where all these clients that i accept can read data from the BufferedReader object that i mentioned above.(so that they can multiplex the data) How do i make these individual client threads read the data from BuffereReader single object? Sorry for the confusion.

    Read the article

  • System.WIndows.Application static members are thread safe?

    - by Lirik
    The Application static members are supposed to be thread safe: The public static (Shared in Visual Basic) members of this type are thread safe. In addition, the FindResource and TryFindResource methods and the Properties and Resources properties are thread safe.1 How much can we trust that statement in a multithreaded environment when calling static member methods of System.Windows.Application? Update: It's all in reference to this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2463822/threading-errors-with-application-loadcomponent-key-already-exists/2463866#2463866 I never thought I'd see a real bug in the library, but this must be the day for me... that question seems to show a genuine bug. Usually it's "user error," but this doesn't seem to be the case.

    Read the article

  • Boost::Mutex & Malloc

    - by M. Tibbits
    Hi all, I'm trying to use a faster memory allocator in C++. I can't use Hoard due to licensing / cost. I was using NEDMalloc in a single threaded setting and got excellent performance, but I'm wondering if I should switch to something else -- as I understand things, NEDMalloc is just a replacement for C-based malloc() & free(), not the C++-based new & delete operators (which I use extensively). The problem is that I now need to be thread-safe, so I'm trying to malloc an object which is reference counted (to prevent excess copying), but which also contains a mutex pointer. That way, if you're about to delete the last copy, you first need to lock the pointer, then free the object, and lastly unlock & free the mutex. However, using malloc to create a boost::mutex appears impossible because I can't initialize the private object as calling the constructor directly ist verboten. So I'm left with this odd situation, where I'm using new to allocate the lock and nedmalloc to allocate everything else. But when I allocate a large amount of memory, I run into allocation errors (which disappear when I switch to malloc instead of nedmalloc ~ but the performance is terrible). My guess is that this is due to fragmentation in the memory and an inability of nedmalloc and new to place nice side by side. There has to be a better solution. What would you suggest?

    Read the article

  • how do you make a "concurrent queue safe" lazy loader (singleton manager) in objective-c

    - by Rich
    Hi, I made this class that turns any object into a singleton, but I know that it's not "concurrent queue safe." Could someone please explain to me how to do this, or better yet, show me the code. To be clear I want to know how to use this with operation queues and dispatch queues (NSOperationQueue and Grand Central Dispatch) on iOS. Thanks in advance, Rich EDIT: I had an idea for how to do it. If someone could confirm it for me I'll do it and post the code. The idea is that proxies make queues all on their own. So if I make a mutable proxy (like Apple does in key-value coding/observing) for any object that it's supposed to return, and always return the same proxy for the same object/identifier pair (using the same kind of lazy loading technique as I used to create the singletons), the proxies would automatically queue up the any messages to the singletons, and make it totally thread safe. IMHO this seems like a lot of work to do, so I don't want to do it if it's not gonna work, or if it's gonna slow my apps down to a crawl. Here's my non-thread safe code: RMSingletonCollector.h // // RMSingletonCollector.h // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/11/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> #import "RMWeakObjectRef.h" struct RMInitializerData { // The method may take one argument. // required SEL designatedInitializer; // data to pass to the initializer or nil. id data; }; typedef struct RMInitializerData RMInitializerData; RMInitializerData RMInitializerDataMake(SEL initializer, id data); @interface NSObject (SingletonCollector) // Returns the selector and data to pass to it (if the selector takes an argument) for use when initializing the singleton. // If you override this DO NOT call super. + (RMInitializerData)designatedInitializerForIdentifier:(NSString *)identifier; @end @interface RMSingletonCollector : NSObject { } + (id)collectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier; + (id<RMWeakObjectReference>)referenceForObjectOfType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier; + (void)destroyCollection; + (void)destroyCollectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier; @end // ==--==--==--==--==Notifications==--==--==--==--== extern NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollection; extern NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollectionObject; RMSingletonCollector.m // // RMSingletonCollector.m // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/11/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // #import "RMSingletonCollector.h" #import <objc/objc-runtime.h> NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollection = @"willDestroySingletonCollection"; NSString *const willDestroySingletonCollectionObject = @"willDestroySingletonCollectionObject"; RMInitializerData RMInitializerDataMake(SEL initializer, id data) { RMInitializerData newData; newData.designatedInitializer = initializer; newData.data = data; return newData; } @implementation NSObject (SingletonCollector) + (RMInitializerData)designatedInitializerForIdentifier:(NSString *)identifier { return RMInitializerDataMake(@selector(init), nil); } @end @interface RMSingletonCollector () + (NSMutableDictionary *)singletonCollection; + (void)setSingletonCollection:(NSMutableDictionary *)newSingletonCollection; @end @implementation RMSingletonCollector static NSMutableDictionary *singletonCollection = nil; + (NSMutableDictionary *)singletonCollection { if (singletonCollection != nil) { return singletonCollection; } NSMutableDictionary *collection = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] initWithCapacity:1]; [self setSingletonCollection:collection]; [collection release]; return singletonCollection; } + (void)setSingletonCollection:(NSMutableDictionary *)newSingletonCollection { if (newSingletonCollection != singletonCollection) { [singletonCollection release]; singletonCollection = [newSingletonCollection retain]; } } + (id)collectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier { id obj; NSString *key; if (identifier) { key = [className stringByAppendingFormat:@".%@", identifier]; } else { key = className; } if (obj = [[self singletonCollection] objectForKey:key]) { return obj; } // dynamic creation. // get a class for Class classForName = NSClassFromString(className); if (classForName) { obj = objc_msgSend(classForName, @selector(alloc)); // if the initializer takes an argument... RMInitializerData initializerData = [classForName designatedInitializerForIdentifier:identifier]; if (initializerData.data) { // pass it. obj = objc_msgSend(obj, initializerData.designatedInitializer, initializerData.data); } else { obj = objc_msgSend(obj, initializerData.designatedInitializer); } [singletonCollection setObject:obj forKey:key]; [obj release]; } else { // raise an exception if there is no class for the specified name. NSException *exception = [NSException exceptionWithName:@"com.RMDev.RMSingletonCollector.failed_to_find_class" reason:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"SingletonCollector couldn't find class for name: %@", [className description]] userInfo:nil]; [exception raise]; [exception release]; } return obj; } + (id<RMWeakObjectReference>)referenceForObjectOfType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier { id obj = [self collectionObjectForType:className identifier:identifier]; RMWeakObjectRef *objectRef = [[RMWeakObjectRef alloc] initWithObject:obj identifier:identifier]; return [objectRef autorelease]; } + (void)destroyCollection { NSDictionary *userInfo = [singletonCollection copy]; [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] postNotificationName:willDestroySingletonCollection object:self userInfo:userInfo]; [userInfo release]; // release the collection and set it to nil. [self setSingletonCollection:nil]; } + (void)destroyCollectionObjectForType:(NSString *)className identifier:(NSString *)identifier { NSString *key; if (identifier) { key = [className stringByAppendingFormat:@".%@", identifier]; } else { key = className; } [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] postNotificationName:willDestroySingletonCollectionObject object:[singletonCollection objectForKey:key] userInfo:nil]; [singletonCollection removeObjectForKey:key]; } @end RMWeakObjectRef.h // // RMWeakObjectRef.h // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/12/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // // In order to offset the performance loss from always having to search the dictionary, I made a retainable, weak object reference class. #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> @protocol RMWeakObjectReference <NSObject> @property (nonatomic, assign, readonly) id objectRef; @property (nonatomic, retain, readonly) NSString *className; @property (nonatomic, retain, readonly) NSString *objectIdentifier; @end @interface RMWeakObjectRef : NSObject <RMWeakObjectReference> { id objectRef; NSString *className; NSString *objectIdentifier; } - (RMWeakObjectRef *)initWithObject:(id)object identifier:(NSString *)identifier; - (void)objectWillBeDestroyed:(NSNotification *)notification; @end RMWeakObjectRef.m // // RMWeakObjectRef.m // RMSingletonCollector // // Created by Rich Meade-Miller on 2/12/11. // Copyright 2011 Rich Meade-Miller. All rights reserved. // #import "RMWeakObjectRef.h" #import "RMSingletonCollector.h" @implementation RMWeakObjectRef @dynamic objectRef; @synthesize className, objectIdentifier; - (RMWeakObjectRef *)initWithObject:(id)object identifier:(NSString *)identifier { if (self = [super init]) { NSString *classNameForObject = NSStringFromClass([object class]); className = classNameForObject; objectIdentifier = identifier; objectRef = object; [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver:self selector:@selector(objectWillBeDestroyed:) name:willDestroySingletonCollectionObject object:object]; [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver:self selector:@selector(objectWillBeDestroyed:) name:willDestroySingletonCollection object:[RMSingletonCollector class]]; } return self; } - (id)objectRef { if (objectRef) { return objectRef; } objectRef = [RMSingletonCollector collectionObjectForType:className identifier:objectIdentifier]; return objectRef; } - (void)objectWillBeDestroyed:(NSNotification *)notification { objectRef = nil; } - (void)dealloc { [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] removeObserver:self]; [className release]; [super dealloc]; } @end

    Read the article

  • Cache consistency & spawning a thread

    - by Dave Keck
    Background I've been reading through various books and articles to learn about processor caches, cache consistency, and memory barriers in the context of concurrent execution. So far though, I have been unable to determine whether a common coding practice of mine is safe in the strictest sense. Assumptions The following pseudo-code is executed on a two-processor machine: int sharedVar = 0; myThread() { print(sharedVar); } main() { sharedVar = 1; spawnThread(myThread); sleep(-1); } main() executes on processor 1 (P1), while myThread() executes on P2. Initially, sharedVar exists in the caches of both P1 and P2 with the initial value of 0 (due to some "warm-up code" that isn't shown above.) Question Strictly speaking – preferably without assuming any particular CPU – is myThread() guaranteed to print 1? With my newfound knowledge of processor caches, it seems entirely possible that at the time of the print() statement, P2 may not have received the invalidation request for sharedVar caused by P1's assignment in main(). Therefore, it seems possible that myThread() could print 0. References These are the related articles and books I've been reading. (It wouldn't allow me to format these as links because I'm a new user - sorry.) Shared Memory Consistency Models: A Tutorial hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/WRL-95-7.pdf Memory Barriers: a Hardware View for Software Hackers rdrop.com/users/paulmck/scalability/paper/whymb.2009.04.05a.pdf Linux Kernel Memory Barriers kernel.org/doc/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach amazon.com/Computer-Architecture-Quantitative-Approach-4th/dp/0123704901/ref=dp_ob_title_bk

    Read the article

  • Is SecureRandom thread safe?

    - by Yishai
    Is SecureRandom thread safe? That is, after initializing it, can access to the next random number be relied on to be thread safe? Examining the source code seems to show that it is, and this bug report seems to indicate that its lack of documentation as thread safe is a javadoc issue. Has anyone confirmed that it is in fact thread safe?

    Read the article

  • NSInvocationOperation and main thread

    - by kpower
    Imagine that I have a view with some UIKit object as its subview (for example, UIActivityIndicatorView - this doesn't matter). This view also has a selector, called doSomething, which somehow manages UIKit object (in our example it can start or stop indicator view). I create NSInvocationOperation (from view's code parts) with initWithTarget:self selector:@selector(doSomething) object:nil. Then add it to NSOperationQueue. And all works fine. How?! It should be a new thread and non-thread-safe UIKit object! Why no error found (and no crash happened)?

    Read the article

  • Accidental Complexity in OpenSSL HMAC functions

    - by Hassan Syed
    SSL Documentation Analaysis This question is pertaining the usage of the HMAC routines in OpenSSL. Since Openssl documentation is a tad on the weak side in certain areas, profiling has revealed that using the: unsigned char *HMAC(const EVP_MD *evp_md, const void *key, int key_len, const unsigned char *d, int n, unsigned char *md, unsigned int *md_len); From here, shows 40% of my library runtime is devoted to creating and taking down **HMAC_CTX's behind the scenes. There are also two additional function to create and destroy a HMAC_CTX explicetly: HMAC_CTX_init() initialises a HMAC_CTX before first use. It must be called. HMAC_CTX_cleanup() erases the key and other data from the HMAC_CTX and releases any associated resources. It must be called when an HMAC_CTX is no longer required. These two function calls are prefixed with: The following functions may be used if the message is not completely stored in memory My data fits entirely in memory, so I choose the HMAC function -- the one whose signature is shown above. The context, as described by the man page, is made use of by using the following two functions: HMAC_Update() can be called repeatedly with chunks of the message to be authenticated (len bytes at data). HMAC_Final() places the message authentication code in md, which must have space for the hash function output. The Scope of the Application My application generates a authentic (HMAC, which is also used a nonce), CBC-BF encrypted protocol buffer string. The code will be interfaced with various web-servers and frameworks Windows / Linux as OS, nginx, Apache and IIS as webservers and Python / .NET and C++ web-server filters. The description above should clarify that the library needs to be thread safe, and potentially have resumeable processing state -- i.e., lightweight threads sharing a OS thread (which might leave thread local memory out of the picture). The Question How do I get rid of the 40% overhead on each invocation in a (1) thread-safe / (2) resume-able state way ? (2) is optional since I have all of the source-data present in one go, and can make sure a digest is created in place without relinquishing control of the thread mid-digest-creation. So, (1) can probably be done using thread local memory -- but how do I resuse the CTX's ? does the HMAC_final() call make the CTX reusable ?. (2) optional: in this case I would have to create a pool of CTX's. (3) how does the HMAC function do this ? does it create a CTX in the scope of the function call and destroy it ? Psuedocode and commentary will be useful.

    Read the article

  • proper use of volatile keyword

    - by luke
    I think i have a pretty good idea about the volatile keyword in java, but i'm thinking about re-factoring some code and i thought it would be a good idea to use it. i have a class that is basically working as a DB Cache. it holds a bunch of objects that it has read from a database, serves requests for those objects, and then occasionally refreshes the database (based on a timeout). Heres the skeleton public class Cache { private HashMap mappings =....; private long last_update_time; private void loadMappingsFromDB() { //.... } private void checkLoad() { if(System.currentTimeMillis() - last_update_time > TIMEOUT) loadMappingsFromDB(); } public Data get(ID id) { checkLoad(); //.. look it up } } So the concern is that loadMappingsFromDB could be a high latency operation and thats not acceptable, So initially i thought that i could spin up a thread on cache startup and then just have it sleep and then update the cache in the background. But then i would need to synchronize my class (or the map). and then i would just be trading an occasional big pause for making every cache access slower. Then i thought why not use volatile i could define the map reference as volatile private volatile HashMap mappings =....; and then in get (or anywhere else that uses the mappings variable) i would just make a local copy of the reference: public Data get(ID id) { HashMap local = mappings; //.. look it up using local } and then the background thread would just load into a temp table and then swap the references in the class HashMap tmp; //load tmp from DB mappings = tmp;//swap variables forcing write barrier Does this approach make sense? and is it actually thread-safe?

    Read the article

  • Is this code thread-safe?

    - by mafutrct
    I've got a class with several properties. On every value update, a Store method is called with stores all fields (in a file). private int _Prop1; public int Prop1 { get { return _Prop1; } set { _Prop1 = value; Store(); } } // more similar properties here... private XmlSerializer _Ser = new ...; private void Store() { lock (_Ser) { using (FileStream fs = new ...) { _Ser.Serialize (fs, this); } } } Is this design thread-safe? (Btw, if you can think of a more appropriate caption, feel free to edit.)

    Read the article

  • Variable lenght arguments in log4cxx LOG4CXX_ macros

    - by Horacio
    I am using log4cxx in a big C++ project but I really don't like how log4cxx handles multiple variables when logging: LOG4CXX_DEBUG(logger, "test " << var1 << " and " << var3 " and .....) I prefer using printf like variable length arguments: LOG4CXX_DEBUG(logger, "test %d and %d", var1, var3) So I implemented this small wrapper on top of log4cxx #include <string.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdarg.h> #include <log4cxx/logger.h> #include "log4cxx/basicconfigurator.h" const char * log_format(const char *fmt, ...); #define MYLOG_TRACE(logger, fmt, ...) LOG4CXX_TRACE(logger, log_format(fmt, ## __VA_ARGS__)) #define MYLOG_DEBUG(logger, fmt, ...) LOG4CXX_DEBUG(logger, log_format(fmt, ## __VA_ARGS__)) #define MYLOG_INFO(logger, fmt, ...) LOG4CXX_INFO(logger, log_format(fmt, ## __VA_ARGS__)) #define MYLOG_WARN(logger, fmt, ...) LOG4CXX_WARN(logger, log_format(fmt, ## __VA_ARGS__)) #define MYLOG_ERROR(logger, fmt, ...) LOG4CXX_ERROR(logger, log_format(fmt, ## __VA_ARGS__)) #define MYLOG_FATAL(logger, fmt, ...) LOG4CXX_FATAL(logger, log_format(fmt, ## __VA_ARGS__)) static log4cxx::LoggerPtr logger(log4cxx::Logger::getRootLogger()); int main(int argc, char **argv) { log4cxx::BasicConfigurator::configure(); MYLOG_INFO(logger, "Start "); MYLOG_WARN(logger, log_format("In running this in %d threads safe?", 1000)); MYLOG_INFO(logger, "End "); return 0; } const char *log_format(const char *fmt, ...) { va_list va; static char formatted[1024]; va_start(va, fmt); vsprintf(formatted, 1024, fmt, va); va_end(va); return formatted; } And this works perfectly but I know using that static variable (formatted) can become problematic if I start using threads and each thread logging to the same place. I am no expert in log4cxx so I was wondering if the LOG4CXX macros are handling concurrent thread access automatically? or do I have to implement some sort of locking around the log_format method? something that I wan't to avoid due to performance implications. Also I would like to ask why if I replace the vsprintf inside the log_format method with vsnprintf (that is more secure) then I get nothing printed? To compile and test this program (in Ubuntu) use : g++ -o loggertest loggertest.cpp -llog4cxx

    Read the article

  • java and threads: very strange behaviour

    - by Derk
    private synchronized Map<Team, StandingRow> calculateStanding() { System.out.println("Calculate standing for group " + getName()); Map<Team, StandingRow> standing = new LinkedHashMap<Team, StandingRow>(); for (Team team : teams) { standing.put(team, new StandingRow(team)); } StandingRow homeTeamRow, awayTeamRow; for (Match match : matches.values()) { homeTeamRow = standing.get(match.getHomeTeam()); awayTeamRow = standing.get(match.getAwayTeam()); System.out.println("Contains key for " + match.getHomeTeam() + ": " + standing.containsKey(match.getHomeTeam())); System.out.println("Contains key for " + match.getAwayTeam() + ": " + standing.containsKey(match.getAwayTeam())); } } This is my code. matches contains 6 elements, but the problem is that after two matches no keys are anymore found in the standing map. The output is for example Contains key for Zuid-Afrika: true Contains key for Mexico: true Contains key for Uruguay: true Contains key for Frankrijk: true Contains key for Zuid-Afrika: false Contains key for Uruguay: false Contains key for Frankrijk: false Contains key for Mexico: false Contains key for Mexico: false Contains key for Uruguay: false Contains key for Frankrijk: false Contains key for Zuid-Afrika: false This is in a threaded environment, but the method is synchronized so I thought that this would not give a problem? I have also a simple unit test for this method and that works well.

    Read the article

  • C# threading a FolderBrowserDialog

    - by Marthin
    Hi, Im trying to use the FolderBrowserDialog to select a folder in C#. At first I got a Thread exception, so I googled what was wrong and fixed that but now im stuck at a nother problem. I whant to know when a folder has been selected. This is what i'v got right now. private void btnWorkingFolder_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { var t = new Thread(SelectFolder); t.IsBackground = true; t.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA); t.Start(); } private void SelectFolder() { FolderBrowserDialog dialog = new FolderBrowserDialog(); if (dialog.ShowDialog() == DialogResult.OK) { txtWorkFolder.Text = dialog.SelectedPath; } } } The problem here is that i cant Set the Text for txtWorkingFolder since im not in the same thread. I dont want to change the thread for txtWorkingFolder, so my question is this, how do I change it's value from the new thread once the DialogResult.OK has been set? Thx for any help! /Marthin

    Read the article

  • VB.net: Is my Thread Safe List Solution actually safe?

    - by Shiftbit
    I've added teh following Extensions to my Project in order to create a thread safe list: Extensions If I want to conduct a simple operation on my list <Extension()> _ Public Sub Action(Of T)(ByVal list As List(Of T), ByVal action As Action(Of List(Of T))) SyncLock (list) action(list) End SyncLock End Sub If I want to pass it more than one parameter I could simply extend it with more items... <Extension()> _ Public Sub Action(Of T)(ByVal list As List(Of T), ByVal action As Action(Of List(Of T), T), ByVal item As T) SyncLock (list) Action(list, item) End SyncLock End Sub Actions I have created the following Action Examples: Private Sub Read(Of T)(ByVal list As List(Of T)) Console.WriteLine("Read") For Each item As T In list Console.WriteLine(item.ToString) Thread.Sleep(10) Next End Sub and also one that takes a parameter: Private Sub Write(Of T)(ByVal list As List(Of T), ByVal item As T) Thread.Sleep(100) list.Add(item) Console.WriteLine("Write") End Sub Initiating Then in my various threads I will call my Actions with: list.Action(AddressOf Read) or list.Action(AddressOf Write2, 10) Are these Extenxion methods thread safe or do you have other recommendations?

    Read the article

  • Ramifications of CheckForIllegalCrossThreadCalls=false

    - by Ron Skufca
    I recently updated an application from VS2003 to VS2008 and I knew I would be dealing with a host of "Cross-thread operation not valid: Control 'myControl' accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on" I am handling this in what I beleive is the correct way (see code sample below). I am running into numerous controls that are going to need a similar fix. Not wanting to have similar code for every label, textbox etc.. that are being accessed by a non UI thread. What are the ramifications of just setting the CheckForIllegalCrossThreadCalls = false for the entire app? I found a CodeProject article with various workarounds and a warning at the bottom to NOT set the property. I am looking for other opinions/experiences on this issue. private void ShowStatus(string szStatus) { try { if (this.statusBar1.InvokeRequired) { BeginInvoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate() { ShowStatus(szStatus); })); } else { statusBar1.Panels[0].Text = szStatus; } } catch (Exception ex) { LogStatus.WriteErrorLog(ex, "Error", "frmMNI.ShowStatus()"); } }

    Read the article

  • Transactional isolation level needed for safely incrementing ids

    - by Knut Arne Vedaa
    I'm writing a small piece of software that is to insert records into a database used by a commercial application. The unique primary keys (ids) in the relevant table(s) are sequential, but does not seem to be set to "auto increment". Thus, I assume, I will have to find the largest id, increment it and use that value for the record I'm inserting. In pseudo-code for brevity: id = select max(id) from some_table id++ insert into some_table values(id, othervalues...) Now, if another thread started the same transaction before the first one finished its insert, you would get two identical ids and a failure when trying to insert the last one. You could check for that failure and retry, but a simpler solution might be setting an isolation level on the transaction. For this, would I need SERIALIZABLE or a lower level? Additionally, is this, generally, a sound way of solving the problem? Are the any other ways of doing it?

    Read the article

  • Can NSTask safely be used outside the main thread?

    - by neoneye
    Yesterday I read somewhere that NSTask isn't thread safe and that bothers me a lot, because I'm running a NSTask within a NSThread and is so far not experiencing any threading issues with it. My code is organized like this A: main thread -> B: worker thread -> C: worker task C: The worker task is a commandline program. B: The worker thread can start/stop the worker task and send it commands. A: The main thread can send commands to the worker thread. If NSTask is supposed to be used only within the main thread, then I'm considering moving the NSTask start/stop code to the main thread, just to prevent possible threading issues. Can NSTask be used outside the main thread? And if not then what may be the threading issues with NSTask?

    Read the article

  • SQLite bulk insert on iPhone not working

    - by App_beginner
    Hi. I have been struggling with this seeminly easy problem for 48 hours, and I am no closer to a solution. So I was hoping that someone might be able to help me. I am building a app, that use a combination of a local (SQLite) database and an online database (PHP/MYSQL). The app is nearly finished. Checked for leaks and work like a charm. However the very last part is the part I have struggled with. On launch, I want the app to check for changes to the online databse, and if there is. I want it to download and parse a xml file containing the changes. Everything is working fine this far. But when I try to bulk insert my parsed data to my database, the app crashes, giving a NSInternalInconsistency error. Due to the database returning SQLITE_MISUSE. I have done a lot of googling, but am still unable to solve my problem. So I am putting the code here, hoping that someone can help me fix this. And I know that I should have used core data for this. But this is the very last part I am struggling with, and I am very reluctant to changing my entire code now. Core data will have to come in the update. Here is the error I recieve: Terminating app due to uncaught exception 'NSInternalInconsistencyException', reason: 'Error while inserting data. 'library routine called out of sequence'' Here is my code: -(void)UpdateDatabase:(const char *)_query NewValues:(NSMutableArray *)_odb dbn:(NSString *)_dbn dbp:(NSString *)_dbp { sqlite3 *database; NSMutableArray *NewValues = _odb; int i; const char *query = _query; sqlite3_stmt *addStmt; for (i = 1; i < [NewValues count]; i++) { if(sqlite3_prepare_v2(database, query, -1, &addStmt, NULL) == SQLITE_OK) { sqlite3_bind_text(addStmt, 1, [[[NewValues objectAtIndex:i] name] UTF8String], -1, SQLITE_TRANSIENT); sqlite3_bind_text(addStmt, 2, [[[NewValues objectAtIndex:i] city]UTF8String], -1, SQLITE_TRANSIENT); sqlite3_bind_double(addStmt, 3, [[[NewValues objectAtIndex:i] lat] doubleValue]); sqlite3_bind_int(addStmt, 4, [[[NewValues objectAtIndex:i] long] doubleValue]); sqlite3_bind_int(addStmt, 5, [[[NewValues objectAtIndex:i] code] intValue]); } if(SQLITE_DONE != sqlite3_step(addStmt)) { NSAssert1(0, @"Error while inserting data. '%s'", sqlite3_errmsg(database)); } //Reset the add statement. sqlite3_reset(addStmt); } }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >