threads, Was: Re: [PD] jack
mpuckett at man104-1.ucsd.edu
Thu Jul 25 19:21:30 CEST 2002
"static" is ok if you want one separate thread to handle all instances of
your extern... if, as in readsf~ and writesf~, you need a separate thread
for each instance, better put the mutexes and whatnot in the instance structure.
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 05:55:11PM +0200, Olaf Matthes wrote:
> CK schrieb:
> > I read:
> > > Miller Puckette wrote:
> > > > It would have to open a separate thread to respond to the jack calls,
> > > > and maintain FIFOs to synchronize between them.
> > which brings me to another question, what do people on the list think
> > about multithreaded externals and shouldn't we agree now on how to
> > implement them.
> > AFAICT from my somewhat limited pthread knowledge each and every extern
> > author using threads should at least prefix mutex/conditional names
> > with externalname_ otherwise we might well deadlock ourselves sooner
> > than later .. any other thoughts/recommendations on this ?
> Well, there already are two threaded objects in the standard Pd distribution:
> readsf~ and writesf~. I've successfully used the same 'principles' in my
> oggamp~ and oggcast~ externals and can run all of them togehter (or several
> instances of the same object) in one patch without any difficulties.
> Maybe I just missed the point but I personally don't see any problems why
> threaded externals should interfere (as long as the mutex/conditional
> variables are declared as 'static'). But I also have to admit that I'm no
> thread-expert.... (not even a C expert, just trying until it works)
More information about the Pd-list