[vwnc] FizzBuzz: What's wrong with the 3rd one?

1 to: 100 do: [ :i | | msg |
    msg := ''.
    (i rem: 3) = 0  ifTrue: [msg := msg , 'Fizz'].
    (i rem: 5) = 0 ifTrue: [msg := msg , 'Buzz'].
    msg isEmpty ifTrue: [msg := i displayString].
    Transcript show: msg; cr.
].
1 to: 100 do: [ :i |
    t := [  (i rem: 3) = 0 ifTrue: ['Fizz'] ifFalse: [''] ].
    f := [ (i rem: 5) = 0 ifTrue: ['Buzz'] ifFalse: [''] ].
    n := [ ( t value, f value ) isEmpty ifTrue: [ i displayString ] ifFalse: [''] ].
    Transcript show: t value, f value, n value; cr.
].
1 to: 100 do: [ :i | 
Transcript show: 
    ((#('' '' Fizz '' Buzz Fizz '' '' Fizz Buzz '' Fizz '' '' FizzBuzz) copy 
        replaceAll: '' with: [ i displayString ]) 
            at: (i rem: 15) + 1) value; cr.
].
1 to: 100 do: [ :i | 
Transcript show: 
    ((#(FizzBuzz '' '' Fizz '' Buzz Fizz '' '' Fizz Buzz '' Fizz '' '') copy 
        replaceAll: '' with: [ i displayString ]) 
            at: (i rem: 15) + 1) value; cr.
].
1 to: 100 do: [ :i | | msg |
    msg := ''.
    (i rem: 3) = 0  ifTrue: [msg := msg , 'Fizz'].
    (i rem: 5) = 0 ifTrue: [msg := msg , 'Buzz'].
    msg isEmpty ifTrue: [msg := i displayString].
    Transcript show: msg; cr.
].
1 to: 100 do: [ :i |
    t := [  (i rem: 3) = 0 ifTrue: ['Fizz'] ifFalse: [''] ].
    f := [ (i rem: 5) = 0 ifTrue: ['Buzz'] ifFalse: [''] ].
    n := [ ( t value, f value ) isEmpty ifTrue: [ i displayString ] ifFalse: [''] ].
    Transcript show: t value, f value, n value; cr.
].
1 to: 100 do: [ :i | 
Transcript show: 
    ((#('' '' Fizz '' Buzz Fizz '' '' Fizz Buzz '' Fizz '' '' FizzBuzz) copy 
        replaceAll: '' with: [ i displayString ]) 
            at: (i rem: 15) + 1) value; cr.
].
I just completed a test application using SQLite, both threaded and 
unthreaded.  Performance issues aside, the threaded version does not 
work well when, within a single image, you have one Smalltalk Process 
(and hence OS thread) writing frequently to the database while a 
separate Smalltalk Process (and hence OS thread) tries to read 
extensively from the database at the same time.  Database errors 
occurred from which the threads could not recover.  There were no OE 
crashes, though.

It appears that the difference between SQLite3ThreadedConnection and 
SQLite3Connection is that the non-threaded version ends up calling a 
bunch of external library methods while the threaded version calls the 
same methods but use the _threaded "keyword" in their invocations.

Chris

Carl Gundel wrote:
> I'm not quite clear on the use of the SQLite3ThreadedConnection class. 
> Currently I'm using its superclass (aptly named SQLite3Connection) in my Run 
> BASIC appserver.  I'm guessing that the threaded one is more appropriate for 
> multiuser web apps, or do I misunderstand what this class is for?
>
> Should I be able to just substitute one for the other?  Is there anything I 
> need to be careful about?  I hope someone here has some experience with it. 
> :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Carl Gundel

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

I just completed a test application using SQLite, both threaded and 
unthreaded.  Performance issues aside, the threaded version does not 
work well when, within a single image, you have one Smalltalk Process 
(and hence OS thread) writing frequently to the database while a 
separate Smalltalk Process (and hence OS thread) tries to read 
extensively from the database at the same time.  Database errors 
occurred from which the threads could not recover.  There were no OE 
crashes, though.

It appears that the difference between SQLite3ThreadedConnection and 
SQLite3Connection is that the non-threaded version ends up calling a 
bunch of external library methods while the threaded version calls the 
same methods but use the _threaded "keyword" in their invocations.

Chris

Carl Gundel wrote:
> I'm not quite clear on the use of the SQLite3ThreadedConnection class. 
> Currently I'm using its superclass (aptly named SQLite3Connection) in my Run 
> BASIC appserver.  I'm guessing that the threaded one is more appropriate for 
> multiuser web apps, or do I misunderstand what this class is for?
>
> Should I be able to just substitute one for the other?  Is there anything I 
> need to be careful about?  I hope someone here has some experience with it. 
> :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Carl Gundel
I just completed a test application using SQLite, both threaded and 
unthreaded.  Performance issues aside, the threaded version does not 
work well when, within a single image, you have one Smalltalk Process 
(and hence OS thread) writing frequently to the database while a 
separate Smalltalk Process (and hence OS thread) tries to read 
extensively from the database at the same time.  Database errors 
occurred from which the threads could not recover.  There were no OE 
crashes, though.

It appears that the difference between SQLite3ThreadedConnection and 
SQLite3Connection is that the non-threaded version ends up calling a 
bunch of external library methods while the threaded version calls the 
same methods but use the _threaded "keyword" in their invocations.

Chris

Carl Gundel wrote:
> I'm not quite clear on the use of the SQLite3ThreadedConnection class. 
> Currently I'm using its superclass (aptly named SQLite3Connection) in my Run 
> BASIC appserver.  I'm guessing that the threaded one is more appropriate for 
> multiuser web apps, or do I misunderstand what this class is for?
>
> Should I be able to just substitute one for the other?  Is there anything I 
> need to be careful about?  I hope someone here has some experience with it. 
> :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Carl Gundel

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

I just completed a test application using SQLite, both threaded and 
unthreaded.  Performance issues aside, the threaded version does not 
work well when, within a single image, you have one Smalltalk Process 
(and hence OS thread) writing frequently to the database while a 
separate Smalltalk Process (and hence OS thread) tries to read 
extensively from the database at the same time.  Database errors 
occurred from which the threads could not recover.  There were no OE 
crashes, though.

It appears that the difference between SQLite3ThreadedConnection and 
SQLite3Connection is that the non-threaded version ends up calling a 
bunch of external library methods while the threaded version calls the 
same methods but use the _threaded "keyword" in their invocations.

Chris

Carl Gundel wrote:
> I'm not quite clear on the use of the SQLite3ThreadedConnection class. 
> Currently I'm using its superclass (aptly named SQLite3Connection) in my Run 
> BASIC appserver.  I'm guessing that the threaded one is more appropriate for 
> multiuser web apps, or do I misunderstand what this class is for?
>
> Should I be able to just substitute one for the other?  Is there anything I 
> need to be careful about?  I hope someone here has some experience with it. 
> :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Carl Gundel

[vwnc] FizzBuzz: What's wrong with the 3rd one?

[vwnc] FizzBuzz: What's wrong with the 3rd one?

Re: [vwnc] FizzBuzz: What's wrong with the 3rd one?

[vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection

Re: [vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection

Re: [vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection

Re: [vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection

Re: [vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection

Re: [vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection

Re: [vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection

Re: [vwnc] Questions about SQLite3ThreadedConnection