• Alexandr Druzhinin (8/8) Sep 03 2013 Hello
• =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= (24/31) Sep 03 2013 These are the ones that I am aware of at this time:
• Alexandr Druzhinin (10/29) Sep 03 2013 This implies some protocol, at least simplest, but hand-made,

Alexandr Druzhinin <drug2004 bk.ru> writes:

Hello
I try to get known if daughter thread finished its work using 
OwnerFailed exception catching like TDPL says, but std.concurrency has 
no such symbol. So, something changed. Can somebody help me with this 
case - finding if a child thread finished/terminated?
I know about spawnLinked, but I want to get known about child state when 
sending, not receiving, because in the last case I don't know what of 
linked child threads is terminated.

=?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:

On 09/03/2013 09:26 AM, Alexandr Druzhinin wrote:

 OwnerFailed exception catching like TDPL says, but std.concurrency has
 no such symbol.

These are the ones that I am aware of at this time:

   MessageMismatch
   OwnerTerminated
   LinkTerminated
   MailboxFull
   PriorityMessageException

 So, something changed. Can somebody help me with this
 case - finding if a child thread finished/terminated?

One way is, the child can send a special message (even the exception 
itself) when it terminates:

// ... at the worker ...
                 try {
                     // ...

                 } catch (shared(Exception) exc) {
                     owner.send(exc);
                 }},

Beware though: There has been problems with "disappearing workers" even 
with that code. The reason is, the code above does not catch Errors. 
However, if it did catch by Error (or, more generally by Throwable), 
then in theory, it shouldn't trust program state sufficiently to be able 
to send a message to the owner.

 I know about spawnLinked, but I want to get known about child state when
 sending, not receiving, because in the last case I don't know what of
 linked child threads is terminated.

I don't think it is a complete solution: Even if you think the child is 
healthy when you send the message, it may terminate right after 
receiving it.

Ali

Alexandr Druzhinin <drug2004 bk.ru> writes:

04.09.2013 0:58, Ali Çehreli пишет:
 One way is, the child can send a special message (even the exception
 itself) when it terminates:

 // ... at the worker ...
                  try {
                      // ...

                  } catch (shared(Exception) exc) {
                      owner.send(exc);
                  }},

This implies some protocol, at least simplest, but hand-made, 
non-standard protocol - I'd like to avoid this if possible and use 
standart ways
 Beware though: There has been problems with "disappearing workers" even
 with that code. The reason is, the code above does not catch Errors.
 However, if it did catch by Error (or, more generally by Throwable),
 then in theory, it shouldn't trust program state sufficiently to be able
 to send a message to the owner.

But if after catching Throwable and sending a message to the parent I 
stop the worker - I won't be needed to trust a worker state, because it 
won't be used more? Or again I need some protocol to avoid this case?
  > I know about spawnLinked, but I want to get known about child state when
  > sending, not receiving, because in the last case I don't know what of
  > linked child threads is terminated.

 I don't think it is a complete solution: Even if you think the child is
 healthy when you send the message, it may terminate right after
 receiving it.

You're absolutely right. So, ultimately I need some communication 
protocol. It would be very nice if phobos has something like message 
pattern in zeromq.