From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kai Grossjohann Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs? Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 14:52:37 +0000 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87llpollxm.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> References: <87oevbes4h.fsf@emacswiki.org> <20031117040607.C6C5D79B72@server2.messagingengine.com> <877k19slxn.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1070809305 19624 80.91.224.253 (7 Dec 2003 15:01:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 15:01:45 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 07 16:01:41 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AT0Pl-00078q-00 for ; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:01:41 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AT0Pl-00042W-00 for ; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:01:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AT1Mv-00082N-1K for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:02:49 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AT1MV-00080j-Kg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:02:23 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AT1Ly-0007lk-QW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:02:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [80.91.224.249] (helo=main.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AT1Ly-0007lX-Eo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:01:50 -0500 Original-Received: from root by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AT0OW-0000fg-00 for ; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:00:24 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from sea.gmane.org ([80.91.224.252]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AT0H6-0000aJ-00 for ; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 15:52:44 +0100 Original-Received: from news by sea.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AT0H6-0004s3-00 for ; Sun, 07 Dec 2003 15:52:44 +0100 Original-Lines: 17 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:MErLO7GEjbJlAA8U4xZBNA8qTSg= X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:18501 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:18501 Thien-Thi Nguyen writes: > because it is likely even new code will need to use old code, and if old > code is ignorant of the new conventions, you will have problems. if new > conventions can be followed in a ways harmonious w/ the old code, you > are ok, but that is not guaranteed. that is probably the impetus behind > the big-lock approach. I see. Hm. I thought that people "just" need to be careful which "old code" they call. And if the old code doesn't work, it would get rewritten. But I guess the big-lock suggestion leads to bad performance in problematic cases, whereas my suggestion leads to wrong results in problematic cases. And bad performance is better than wrong results. Kai