-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 925
Commit
- 9.4.12.0
- 9.4.11.0
- 9.4.10.0
- 9.4.9.0
- 9.4.8.0
- 9.4.7.0
- 9.4.6.0
- 9.4.5.0
- 9.4.4.0
- 9.4.3.0
- 9.4.2.0
- 9.4.1.0
- 9.4.0.0
- 9.3.15.0
- 9.3.14.0
- 9.3.13.0
- 9.3.12.0
- 9.3.11.0
- 9.3.10.0
- 9.3.9.0
- 9.3.8.0
- 9.3.7.0
- 9.3.6.0
- 9.3.5.0
- 9.3.4.0
- 9.3.3.0
- 9.3.2.0
- 9.3.1.0
- 9.3.0.0
- 9.2.21.0
- 9.2.20.1
- 9.2.20.0
- 9.2.19.0
- 9.2.18.0
- 9.2.17.0
- 9.2.16.0
- 9.2.15.0
- 9.2.14.0
- 9.2.13.0
- 9.2.12.0
- 9.2.11.1
- 9.2.11.0
- 9.2.10.0
- 9.2.9.0
- 9.2.8.0
- 9.2.7.0
- 9.2.6.0
- 9.2.5.0
- 9.2.4.1
- 9.2.4.0
- 9.2.3.0
- 9.2.2.0
- 9.2.1.0
- 9.2.0.0
- 9.1.17.0
- 9.1.16.0
- 9.1.15.0
- 9.1.14.0
- 9.1.13.0
- 9.1.12.0
- 9.1.11.0
- 9.1.10.0
- 9.1.9.0
- 9.1.8.0
- 9.1.7.0
- 9.1.6.0
- 9.1.5.0
- 9.1.4.0
- 9.1.3.0
- 9.1.2.0
- 9.1.1.0
- 9.1.0.0
- 9.0.5.0
- 9.0.4.0
- 9.0.3.0
- 9.0.1.0
- 9.0.0.0
- 9.0.0.0.rc2
- 9.0.0.0.rc1
- 9.0.0.0.pre2
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -118,8 +118,6 @@ public void pauseAllThreadsAndExecuteFromNonRubyThread(Consumer<RubyThread> acti | |
} | ||
|
||
private synchronized void pauseAllThreadsAndExecute(boolean holdsGlobalLock, Consumer<RubyThread> action) { | ||
CompilerDirectives.transferToInterpreter(); | ||
|
||
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry, something went wrong.
chrisseaton
Contributor
|
||
this.action = action; | ||
|
||
/* this is a potential cause for race conditions, | ||
|
3 comments
on commit e44268c
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I get the idea and it works well in this case. The only thing I'm not sure about is having nodes that aren't @CoreMethod
in a @CoreClass
- that might be confusing. But I'm nitpicking.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, but I'd rather keep nodes with a given receiver type together than split them in a third hypothetical hierarchy :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like it. And I like keeping it grouped with the receiver. If we want a new namespace, I'd shove them into another inner class named "RubiniusHelpers" or something.
Unintended change ...