From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Vollmer Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp and Guile Date: 12 Aug 2002 15:40:33 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200207200035.g6K0ZAb27891@aztec.santafe.edu> <200207212015.g6LKF4c00874@aztec.santafe.edu> <200207251807.g6PI75d07615@aztec.santafe.edu> <874renlito.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> <200207271853.g6RIre710837@aztec.santafe.edu> <200207310554.g6V5ssc16508@aztec.santafe.edu> <200208021743.g72HhkX01596@aztec.santafe.edu> <200208071424.g77EO1103149@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200208091639.g79Gd9mf003557@santafe.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1029159692 29543 127.0.0.1 (12 Aug 2002 13:41:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 13:41:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: neil@ossau.uklinux.net, raeburn@raeburn.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17eFRr-0007gO-00 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:41:31 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17eFpu-0005qZ-00 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 16:06:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17eFSX-0005NB-00; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 09:42:13 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17eFRg-0005Jz-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 09:41:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17eFRf-0005JY-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 09:41:20 -0400 Original-Received: from krusty.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de ([129.217.163.1] helo=mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17eFRe-0005JP-00; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 09:41:18 -0400 Original-Received: from burns.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (burns.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.163.19]) by mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C10A0A3831; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:41:14 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by burns.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix, from userid 520) id 550E326134; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:40:33 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <200208091639.g79Gd9mf003557@santafe.santafe.edu> Original-Lines: 13 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:6457 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:6457 Richard Stallman writes: > However, there is no way to prevent 'yield' or > SCM_TICK from switching during critical sections. > > I'm not sure I understand that properly. If we avoid calling yield > or SCM_TICK within critical sections, won't that prevent thread > switches within critical sections? Yes, but you might not be able to avoid to call a function during a critical section that calls SCM_TICK without you wanting it. Having to keep track of which functions are guaranteed to not to call SCM_TICK or yield is not very reliable, I think.