The good news is that JavaScript is single threaded; this means that solutions will generally work well with “shared” variables, i.e. no mutex locks are required. If you want to serialize asynch tasks, followed by a completion callback you could use this helper function: function serializeTasks(arr, fn, done) { var current = 0; fn(function iterate() … Read more
You, my friend, are looking for jQuery “when”. http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.when/ To force anything to be synchronous, you can use something like this…. $.when($(this).trigger(‘custom-event’)).done(function(){ window.location.href=”https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13338484/url”; });
No; synchronized only prevents multiple threads from simultaneously executing the method in the same instance. If you have n instances, there could be n threads, each executing the method in one of the instances. If you need to ensure that only one thread may execute the method across all instances, you should make the method … Read more
Please see my updates at the end of the answer, the situation has dramatically changed since Visual Studio 2015. The original answer is below. I made a very simple test and according to my measurements the std::mutex is around 50-70x slower than CRITICAL_SECTION. std::mutex: 18140574us CRITICAL_SECTION: 296874us Edit: After some more tests it turned out … Read more
Generally git pull is enough, but I’m not sure what layout you have chosen (or has github chosen for you).
syncObject is changing each time you ++ it (the ++ is converting it to a primitive int, incrementing it, and then autoboxing it back to the Integer object. Integer objects are immutable … once they are created, they cannot change. Bottom ine is that you are not using the same syncPObj in all the threads, … Read more
Measure the elapsed time between sending the request and getting back the response. Then, divide that value by 2. That gives you a rough value of one-way latency. If you add that to the time value from the server, you’ll be closer to the true server time. Something like this should work: function syncTime() { … Read more
You can’t await a task inside a lock scope (which is syntactic sugar for Monitor.Enter and Monitor.Exit). Using a Monitor directly will fool the compiler but not the framework. async-await has no thread-affinity like a Monitor does. The code after the await will probably run in a different thread than the code before it. Which … Read more
Guava has something like this being released in 13.0; you can get it out of HEAD if you like. Striped<Lock> more or less allocates a specific number of locks, and then assigns strings to locks based on their hash code. The API looks more or less like Striped<Lock> locks = Striped.lock(stripes); Lock l = locks.get(string); … Read more
Even though you can use them in the way you describe, mutexes weren’t designed for use as a notification/synchronization mechanism. They are meant to provide mutually exclusive access to a shared resource. Using mutexes to signal a condition is awkward and I suppose would look something like this (where Thread1 is signaled by Thread2): Thread1: … Read more