RE: Channels versus Methods

["P.H.Welch" <P.H.Welch@xxxxxxxxx>]

Amazing that however many times you read something through before posting,
you always find a silly immediately afterwards ...

> Or we can simply lock the CALL sequence using the channel object (which
> can therefor remain just 1-1):
> 
> 
>     synchronise (c) {
>       c.write (null);                    // ready to make the CALL
>       Thing result = B.calculate (...);  // or some other Foo method
>       c.write (null);                    // the CALL is complete
>     }

That's silly because locking on the channel itself will screw up the internal
algorithms that implement it!  I just grabbed the channel for convenience.
A new one should have been used:

    Object c.lock = new Object ();

and then:

>     synchronise (c.lock) {
>       c.write (null);                    // ready to make the CALL
>       Thing result = B.calculate (...);  // or some other Foo method
>       c.write (null);                    // the CALL is complete
>     }

This was done correctly later in the posting (see One2ManyCallChannel).

Cheers,

Peter.