At Thu, 24 Jan 2019 14:16:55 -0800 (PST), Brian Adkins wrote:
> I'm not familiar with the implementation of Racket's logging, but it seems
> reasonable that once (log-message) returns the log message would be
> immediately available for sync'ing i.e. it's not arriving asynchronously.
That's corr
On Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 12:44:51 AM UTC-5, gneuner2 wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/23/2019 12:02 PM, Brian Adkins wrote:
> > It looks like you're still using an arbitrary wait time to assume the
> > logging event queue is empty. I like it much better than my sleep
> > idea, but it seems like there
On 1/23/2019 12:02 PM, Brian Adkins wrote:
It looks like you're still using an arbitrary wait time to assume the
logging event queue is empty. I like it much better than my sleep
idea, but it seems like there is still the problem of choosing between
1) using a timeout value to short and miss
Thanks.
It looks like you're still using an arbitrary wait time to assume the
logging event queue is empty. I like it much better than my sleep idea, but
it seems like there is still the problem of choosing between 1) using a
timeout value to short and missing a log message, or 2) using a time
On 1/20/2019 6:34 PM, Brian Adkins wrote:
Thanks.
I do use dynamic-wind in various ways now, but I'm not sure how it
would help me in this particular scenario. My log receiver thread is
simply in a loop sync'ing on the logger, so I can't wait for my
thread. I don't know how to determine when
5 matches
Mail list logo
