On 11/4/2023 12:51 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 11/4/2023 2:19 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 01.11.2023 um 20:59 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>>
>>> Huh? The benaphore is a semaphore! So, both of you are totally wrong
>>> here. Think about it...
>>
>> Google for "benaphore mutex" and you'll find several refernces that a
>> benaphore is a mutex, including the two articles I've referred so far.
>>
>
> MORON!!!

The benaphore is a semaphore using a bakery algorithm. You are
completely confused and incoherently flailing around.

On 11/4/2023 12:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 11/4/2023 12:51 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 11/4/2023 2:19 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 01.11.2023 um 20:59 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>>>
>>>> Huh? The benaphore is a semaphore! So, both of you are totally wrong
>>>> here. Think about it...
>>>
>>> Google for "benaphore mutex" and you'll find several refernces that a
>>> benaphore is a mutex, including the two articles I've referred so far.
>>>
>>
>> MORON!!!
>
> The benaphore is a semaphore using a bakery algorithm. You are
> completely confused and incoherently flailing around.

https://vorbrodt.blog/2019/02/05/fast-semaphore

On 11/3/2023 7:10 AM, Michael S wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 16:02:04 -0000 (UTC)
> Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-11-02, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Am 02.11.2023 um 15:58 schrieb Scott Lurndal:
>>>
>>>> No. Each is distinct.
>>>
>>> You can initialize a binary semaphore with true and use it
>>> as a mutex. And a mutex can be realized without a short path
>>> but just with a binary semaphore in the mentioned way.
>>
>> You can use a label, if and goto as a while loop.
>>
>> That doesn't mean if and goto /are/ while.
>>
>> Speaking of which, I have often mused that sempahores are like the go
>> to statement of synchronization---which is ironic, given their
>> inventor.
>>
>
> IMHO, the word 'mutex' has no exact meaning agreed by all or even
> majority of Computer Science community.
>

mutual exclusion?

On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/3/2023 7:10 AM, Michael S wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 16:02:04 -0000 (UTC)
>> Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-11-02, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Am 02.11.2023 um 15:58 schrieb Scott Lurndal:
>>>>
>>>>> No. Each is distinct.
>>>>
>>>> You can initialize a binary semaphore with true and use it
>>>> as a mutex. And a mutex can be realized without a short path
>>>> but just with a binary semaphore in the mentioned way.
>>>
>>> You can use a label, if and goto as a while loop.
>>>
>>> That doesn't mean if and goto /are/ while.
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, I have often mused that sempahores are like the go
>>> to statement of synchronization---which is ironic, given their
>>> inventor.
>>>
>>
>> IMHO, the word 'mutex' has no exact meaning agreed by all or even
>> majority of Computer Science community.
>>
>
> mutual exclusion?

Yeah; you know. I lock it, then somehow cleanly stay out of your way
while you unlock. Mutual exclusion!

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

> The surrounding code is the mutex. ...

You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates
on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.

Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

> The surrounding code is the mutex. ...

You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates
on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.

Am 04.11.2023 um 20:44 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

> Oh god. The benaphore is a semaphore. ...

It's a mutex; google for "benaphore mutex -semaphore" and you'll
see a lot of people telling the same like me.

On 2023-11-04, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe I missed some header which is implicitly included with me.
> The code compiles fine with g++, clang++, clang-cl and MSVC on
> my PC.

It compiles, but aborts when running...

>> maxa@Branimirs-MacBook-Air News % g++ -O2 run.cpp -o run -std=c++20
>> run.cpp:37:2: warning: non-void lambda does not return a value [-Wreturn-type]
>> };
>> ^
>> 1 warning generated.
>> bmaxa@Branimirs-MacBook-Air News % ./run
>> libc++abi: terminating
>> zsh: abort ./run
>>
>

--

7-77-777, Evil Sinner!
https://www.linkedin.com/in/branimir-maksimovic-6762bbaa/

On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
> like me.

Bandwagon Fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>> like me.
>
> Bandwagon Fallacy
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.

On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>
>> The surrounding code is the mutex. ...
>
> You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates
> on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.

Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be
used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what
thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic.
Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me?

A semaphore does not have a concept of ownership. However, a mutex does.

On 11/5/2023 9:55 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
>> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>>> like me.
>>
>> Bandwagon Fallacy
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>
> In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.
>

Sorry buddy! A benaphore is a semaphore. You, along with the "experts"
that try to say that a benaphore is a mutex are 100% completely wrong.
Got it?

On 11/4/2023 12:54 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 11/4/2023 12:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 11/4/2023 12:51 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 11/4/2023 2:19 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>> Am 01.11.2023 um 20:59 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>>>>
>>>>> Huh? The benaphore is a semaphore! So, both of you are totally
>>>>> wrong here. Think about it...
>>>>
>>>> Google for "benaphore mutex" and you'll find several refernces that a
>>>> benaphore is a mutex, including the two articles I've referred so far.
>>>>
>>>
>>> MORON!!!
>>
>> The benaphore is a semaphore using a bakery algorithm. You are
>> completely confused and incoherently flailing around.
>
> https://vorbrodt.blog/2019/02/05/fast-semaphore

Fwiw, Joe Seigh created a really interesting read/write ticket based
bakery algorithm a long time ago back in comp.programming.threads. It
was a spinlock, but the logic was rather elegant. Humm... I wonder if I
can find that old thread!

On 11/5/2023 12:12 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 11/5/2023 9:55 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
>>> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>>>> like me.
>>>
>>> Bandwagon Fallacy
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>>
>> In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.
>>
>
> Sorry buddy! A benaphore is a semaphore. You, along with the "experts"
> that try to say that a benaphore is a mutex are 100% completely wrong.
> Got it?

Actually, an "expert" that tries to say that a benaphore is a mutex
should be FIRED on the spot.

On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
>> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>>> like me.
>>
>> Bandwagon Fallacy
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>
> In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.

Firstly, "I googled this up" to "experts" is a huge leap.

Secondly, when have you ever recognized or acknowledged expertise?

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>>
>>> The surrounding code is the mutex. ...
>>
>> You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates
>> on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.
>
> Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be
> used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what
> thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic.
> Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me?

It's like someone paid to misunderstand ... only minus any actual money.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, an "expert" that tries to say that a benaphore is a mutex
> should be FIRED on the spot.

They probably are; just not from the Google search index.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

On 11/5/2023 2:54 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>>>
>>>> The surrounding code is the mutex. ...
>>>
>>> You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates
>>> on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.
>>
>> Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be
>> used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what
>> thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic.
>> Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me?
>
> It's like someone paid to misunderstand ... only minus any actual money.
>

Humm... Interesting comment! Almost hard to disagree with wrt the, Bontia...

On 11/5/2023 2:55 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Actually, an "expert" that tries to say that a benaphore is a mutex
>> should be FIRED on the spot.
>
> They probably are; just not from the Google search index.
>

Wow. Yup. Well, shit happens. Your company hired Bontia, and he starts
trying to tell everybody that a benaphore is a mutex... Well... This a
place for a highly sarcastic comic I have been thinking about creating
called "Codan the Barbarian". If Codan heard Bonita say that, the ring
of skulls he carries around would start glowing white hot... Then Codan
would flip out. Codan is about 7 feet tall and around 340 pounds, not an
ounce of fat. He happens to be a talented programmer.

On 2023-11-06, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/5/2023 2:54 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> On 2023-11-05, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/4/2023 9:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>> Am 04.11.2023 um 20:42 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>>>>
>>>>> The surrounding code is the mutex. ...
>>>>
>>>> You didn't understand me. The surrounding code that operates
>>>> on the guarded data structure isn't the mutex.
>>>
>>> Any semaphore can be used as a binary semaphore, which can in turn be
>>> used for mutual exclusion. Now, the mutex logic itself can record what
>>> thread has ownership, ect... This is separate from the semaphore logic.
>>> Are you sure that you are not misunderstanding me?
>>
>> It's like someone paid to misunderstand ... only minus any actual money.
>
> Humm... Interesting comment! Almost hard to disagree with wrt the, Bontia...

It's a variation on a quote from Upton Sinclair, evidently found in
_I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked_ [1935]

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary
depends on his not understanding it."

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

Am 05.11.2023 um 21:12 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
> On 11/5/2023 9:55 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
>>> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>>>> like me.
>>>
>>> Bandwagon Fallacy
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>>
>> In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.
>>
>
> Sorry buddy! A benaphore is a semaphore. ...

If you take it like that every mutex is also a binary semaphore.

On 11/5/2023 7:44 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 05.11.2023 um 21:12 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>> On 11/5/2023 9:55 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
>>>> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>>>>> like me.
>>>>
>>>> Bandwagon Fallacy
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>>>
>>> In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry buddy! A benaphore is a semaphore. ...
>
> If you take it like that every mutex is also a binary semaphore.
>
>

Nope. Wow, you massively confused! A mutex does not need to use
semaphore logic, it can have its own fast path algorithm, XCHG for
instance. However, it can use a semaphore for its slow paths. You are
being radically obtuse here. Wow.

Am 05.11.2023 um 21:12 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
> On 11/5/2023 9:55 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
>>> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>>>> like me.
>>>
>>> Bandwagon Fallacy
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>>
>> In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.
>>
>
> Sorry buddy! A benaphore is a semaphore. You, along with the "experts"
> that try to say that a benaphore is a mutex are 100% completely wrong.
> Got it?

If you take it that way every mutex is a binary seamphore;
but no one refers to a mutex as a semaphore.

Am 06.11.2023 um 05:10 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>
> Nope. Wow, you massively confused! A mutex does not need to use
> semaphore logic, it can have its own fast path algorithm, XCHG for
> instance. ...

With pure userland-logic you won't have the opportunity to sleep for
a mutex or to be awakened.

On 2023-11-06, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am 05.11.2023 um 21:12 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>> On 11/5/2023 9:55 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 05.11.2023 um 18:25 schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
>>>> On 2023-11-05, Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> google for ... and you'll see a lot of people telling the same
>>>>> like me.
>>>>
>>>> Bandwagon Fallacy
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
>>>
>>> In most cases experts are right if they agree on a certain fact.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry buddy! A benaphore is a semaphore. ...
>
> If you take it like that every mutex is also a binary semaphore.

Umm, nope! Because you can't use a mutex, for instance, in
signaling "item available" in a producer consumer queue.

You can't have a producer doing nothing but unlock(mutex) to signal that
it has added an item, and a consumer doing nothing but lock(mutex).

If that happens to work, then we know the mutex is really a semaphore.

If it works, but the documentation says that the behavior is undefined,
we probably shouldn't do that, but use something that is documented.

No mutex provided in any mainstream operating system supports this
as a documented case that is required to work.

No implementation of POSIX mutexes, not Windows' CRITICAL_SECTION, not
Win32 Mutexes, not C++ or ISO C mutexes.

You don't care that something is undefined because you're a professional
troll, not a professional developer.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.