[Solved] Identify the issue in this Ruby code related to thread safety and suggest a fix:mutex = Mutex.new counter = 0 threads = 3.times.map do Thread.new do 100.times do counter += 1 end end end threads.... | Ruby

Ruby - Concurrent Programming

Identify the issue in this Ruby code related to thread safety and suggest a fix:

mutex = Mutex.new
counter = 0
threads = 3.times.map do
  Thread.new do
    100.times do
      counter += 1
    end
  end
end
threads.each(&:join)
puts counter

AThe threads array is not joined properly; use threads.each(&:wait)

BThe counter increment is not synchronized; wrap it with mutex.synchronize { counter += 1 }

CMutex is unnecessary because GIL prevents race conditions

DUse Thread.fork instead of Thread.new for better safety

Step-by-Step Solution

Solution:

Step 1: Identify thread safety issue
Incrementing counter is not atomic and can cause race conditions.
Step 2: Use mutex to synchronize
Wrap counter increment inside mutex.synchronize block to ensure atomicity.
Final Answer:
The counter increment is not synchronized; wrap it with mutex.synchronize { counter += 1 } -> Option B
Quick Check:
Mutex ensures safe access to shared data [OK]

Quick Trick: Use mutex.synchronize to protect shared variable increments [OK]

Common Mistakes:

Assuming GIL prevents all race conditions
Using incorrect thread join method
Believing Thread.fork improves thread safety

Master "Concurrent Programming" in Ruby

9 interactive learning modes - each teaches the same concept differently

Learn Why Deep Visual Try Challenge Project Recall Time

More Ruby Quizzes

Identify the issue in this Ruby code related to thread safety and suggest a fix:

Step 1: Identify thread safety issue

Step 2: Use mutex to synchronize

Final Answer:

Quick Check:

Want More Practice?