[m-rev.] the grade library is ready for review

Zoltan Somogyi zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com
Mon Apr 18 23:48:35 AEST 2016

On Tue, 05 Apr 2016 00:37:24 +1000 (AEST), "Zoltan Somogyi" <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com> wrote:
> > I've been checking some compilation model combinations.  I found that it was
> > okay with:
> > 
> >     $ ./choose_grade thread_safe=thread_safe debug=debug
> >     $ ./choose_grade thread_safe=thread_safe deep_prof=deep_prof
> > 
> > AFAIK these don't work with multiple threads.  Is there a missing
> > constraint?
> I think you are right: neither the debugger nor the deep profiler
> will work correctly in the presence of multiple threads, so neither
> the current compiler nor the grade library should accept either grade.
> I will add the missing constraints, though I will wait until we think
> we have identified all the other missing constraints as well, since
> that reduces redundant work. Thanks.

To reflect these constraints in the grade structure, I also need to know
whether we support the combination of thread safety with either
(a) mprof-style profiling, using either the llds or the mlds backend, and
(b) the source-to-source debugger for hlc grades. I don't know the
answers to those questions. Does anyone else?


More information about the reviews mailing list