Comments by FDW (Top 19 by date)

I was too hasty, and removed my comment: "There is nothing buggy in the given code, it has been fully unit tested and in production." Obviously it was buggy.

Nested locking as 'lock (po1) { lock (po2) { ... } }' may create dead locks! to be on the safe side do not use this. But I do agree, if you have total control over the locking order (both objects to lock are private for instance) than it can be used (in rare cases)

Yes the code was (is) tested, but clearly not good enough

Ooops, did not see that. I did fix the code. Thanks for spotting this.

>> Imagine that the lock to po1 is true, but for po2 is false (or vice-versa).

>> It will not return, and later will lock po1 again.


That is the idea

There is nothing buggy in the given code, it has been fully unit tested and in production. The point is, you need to use DuoEnter() and DuoExit() as given, both with the same parameters (null or not null).

Nested locking as 'lock (po1) { lock (po2) { ... } }' will create dead locks!
You can never guaranty that both objects are locked in the same order (if you can, than you do not need to lock both).

Reason for my vote of 5
Nice, I like it, and I am bookmarking it :)

Reason for my vote of 5
Makes you think, and then you are going to like it.

That is what I forgot about, or, I thought that one of the things you wanted to get rid of was the long conditional. I will update my alternate to use one conditional for all tests.

My main point against your solution is the usage of an array, it takes time and memory, and serves no real purpose.

The other point to make is, I do like the multiple if’s and return’s it is (to me) more clear (from the code structure) what happens and why. The early exit, when the first test demands so, is easily seen.

Reason for my vote of 5
I just like it

When will you show us the decoder? or will that just deleet the text?

Cool, I like it (and I tested it).

Omar,

I like it, it has my vote of 5. I also see there have been some 'low' votes, is there a explanation for the low votes? I would like to know why (the low votes). Am I missing some thing?

Regards,
Frans.