{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025817555938037865, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0004302925989672978, 'mean_word_length': 4.916030534351145, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A generalized queue scheme for process synchronization and communication

A conceptual data structure called a "sequence" is proposed as a general structure for interprocess synchronization and communication functions in multi-tasking computer systems. This structure, and the operations allowed with it, can be shown to be a superset of the Dijkstra P and V operations, an acceptable model for stream I/O functions, and an acceptable model for most interprocess communications functions, including "wait for event" type functions. The "sequence" as herein defined is a queue-like structure implemented such that in the general case, queue length can vary from zero to infinity and entries can be added or deleted on either end. Each entry, in addition to any chain pointers or validity indicators necessary for implementation, would contain an elementary data structure (a bit, word, vector, array, etc) which could, in the limiting case be a null vector, and could also, in some implementations be a des-criptor of some resource. Each end of the sequence would be treated as a shared resource and would be controlled by a descriptor. The contents of the sequence itself would conceptually be the property of the "hardware" system, although the physical space for the queue could belong to some process if necessary or desirable. Special mechanisms would be provided to operate on sequences. In addition to the operations to create and destroy sequences, and operations to pass control of sequences (ie, pass descriptors) from one task to another, there would be operations to ADD, REMOVE, and SENSE. The ADD operation would add a data item to the referenced end of the sequence. The REMOVE operation would copy out the next data item of the referenced end of the sequence, and then delete the item from the sequence. The SENSE would permit the next data item in the sequence to be examined without actually REMOVEing it. Three important details of the implementation should be noted: First, the REMOVE operation, upon attempting to remove an entry when the sequence is empty, will cause the executing task to be suspended until such time as an entry is placed in the sequence. Multiple tasks may all suspend on the same sequence, causing their requests to be effectively "daisy-chained" together such that, when an item ]2