Semaphores are hard to use in practice because quite low level Monitors provide an easier definition of concurrent objects at the level of Prog. Lang.

It guarantees mutual exclusion.

Inter-process synchronization is done through *conditions*, which are objects that provide the following operations:
- ***wait*:** the invoking process suspends, enters into the condition's queue, and releases the mutex on the monitor
- ***signal*:** if no process is in the condition's queue, the nothing happens. Otherwise
	- reactivates the first suspended process, suspends the signaling process that however has a priority to re-enter the monitor (*Hoare semantics*)
	- completes its task and the first process in the condition's queue has the priority to enter the monitor (after that the signaling one terminates or suspends) (*Mesa semantics*).

#### A very typical use: Rendez-vous
A soon as a process arrives at a barrier it needs to suspend and wait for every other process to reach the barrier.

```
monitor RNDV :=
	cnt ∈ {0,…,m} init at 0
	condition B
	operation barrier() :=
		cnt++
		if cnt < m then
			B.wait()
		else
			cnt <- 0
		B.signal()
		return
```
The last process wakes up one of the others, then he wakes up another one etc...
Of course, `signal()` will have no effect on the last process who calls it.

#### Monitor implementation through semaphores
*Hoare semantics*

- A semaphore MUTEX init at 1 (to guarantee mutex in the monitor)
- For every condition C, a semaphore SEMC init at 0 and an integer $N_{C}$ init at 0 (to store and count the number of suspended processes on the given condition)
- A semaphore PRIO init at 0 and an integer $N_{PR}$ init at 0 (to store and count the number of processes that have performed a signal, and so have priority to re-enter the monitor)

>[!note]Operations
>Every monitor operation starts with `MUTEX.down()` and ends with `if NPR > 0 then PRIO.up() else MUTEX.up()`

```
C.wait() :=
	NC++
	if NPR > 0 then
		PRIO.up()
	else
		MUTEX.up()
	SEMC.down()
	NC--
	return

C.signal() :=
	if NC > 0 then
		NPR++
		SEMC.up()
		PRIO.down()
		NPR--
```
p.s. The wait **always** suspends, even if there is only a process.

#### Readers/Writers problem, strong priority to Readers
```
monitor RW_READERS :=
	AR, WR, AW, WW init at 0
	condition CR, CW

operation begin_read() :=
	WR++
	if AW != 0 then
		CR.wait()
		CR.signal()
	AR++
	WR--

operation end_read() :=
	AR--
	if AR + WR = 0 then
		CW.signal()

operation begin_write() :=
	if (AR+WR != 0 or AW != 0) then
		CW.wait()
	AW++

operation end_write() :=
	AW--
	if WR > 0 then
		CR.signal()
	else
		CW.signal()

```

#### Readers/Writers problem, strong priority to Writers
```
monitor RW_READERS :=
	AR, WR, AW, WW init at 0
	condition CR, CW

operation begin_read() :=
	if WW + AW != 0 then
		CR.wait()
		CR.signal()
	AR++

operation end_read() :=
	AR--
	if AR = 0 then
		CW.signal()

operation begin_write() :=
	WW++
	if (AR + AW != 0) then
		CW.wait()
	AW++
	WW--

operation end_write() :=
	AW--
	if WW > 0 then
		CW.signal()
	else
		CR.signal()
```

#### Readers/Writers problem, a fair solution
- after a write, all waiting readers are enabled
- during a read, new readers must wait if writers are waiting
```
monitor RW_READERS :=
	AR, WR, AW, WW init at 0
	condition CR, CW

operation begin_read() :=
	WR++
	if WW + AW != 0 then
		CR.wait()
		CR.signal()
	AR++
	WR--

operation end_read() :=
	AR--
	if AR = 0 then
		CW.signal()

operation begin_write() :=
	WW++
	if (AR + AW != 0) then
		CW.wait()
	AW++
	WW--

operation end_write() :=
	AW--
	if WR > 0 then
		CR.signal()
	else
		CW.signal()
```
This way nobody gets starved forever.