From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Colascione Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer' Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 02:26:28 -0800 Message-ID: <4D47DFD4.1040108@gmail.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig41D2368DB3B58EB116E488AE" X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296556020 13087 80.91.229.12 (1 Feb 2011 10:27:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 10:27:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Tom Tromey , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 01 11:26:55 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PkDRl-0002XY-OS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:26:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59153 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PkDRl-0000gg-6y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 05:26:53 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53721 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PkDRX-0000eH-Bi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 05:26:40 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PkDRW-0007Pn-70 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 05:26:39 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:54022) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PkDRU-0007PZ-R9; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 05:26:36 -0500 Original-Received: by iwn40 with SMTP id 40so7550333iwn.0 for ; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 02:26:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=VClistY07PEEsgZS1h1pj37nym9vy05rTy4wLxDcNZ8=; b=WGmWyb8NcBgtQNDp4lMOcgbfGB14buZDybfIzaAsVpSETKskxHzYx+UuXtk8uYN8mE i6X21qeSSYstJVQ3pWckkZfD/myFhTOuPlghyz9BOI55ot/wQNK/xwedt1Vmv5v0Blz0 KsVdsqsmXMrWvx4F4FYskm1SKjHdW2c4e2uGg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=xhvbF1vXQVxBWSr+hE5uavzS7DAhQ36g48Gs2ndD4UJSJLG3WMGwFGoFPYygHsLHe4 369yL/4hgDq4ob8zdFBzIEsfvrNMTP2uflAqOAEweUzTIrhn1x4nbPg1/gpVaxQh/Ezt TC/gJRVDyYlDNOFSo4XpX1KXQYcU6++9pcTIY= Original-Received: by 10.42.172.130 with SMTP id n2mr9302899icz.295.1296555995401; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 02:26:35 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from edith.local (c-67-183-23-114.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.183.23.114]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z4sm18742255ibg.7.2011.02.01.02.26.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 01 Feb 2011 02:26:34 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.214.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:135394 Archived-At: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig41D2368DB3B58EB116E488AE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 1/31/11 11:37 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: > Yes. I think that is the right tradeoff given my long term goal, w= hich > is preemptive multi-threading. >=20 > I don't think preemptive thread switching is a sensible goal. It is > so much trouble that it isn't worth doing even in the long term. > Thus, it is a mistake to do much work now, or complicate the code now, > or cause a slowdown now, for the sake of preemptive thread switching. The world is increasingly moving toward parallel processing, and we haven't seen single-core performance improve for years now. Meanwhile, Emacs has become more computationally demanding, not only through new features like CEDET, but via improvements to old ones as well. I find myself regularly bumping up against CPU limits in my Emacs hacking. Processor trends won't change any time soon, and forfeiting the power of multi-core machines by proscribing OS-level, preemptive multitasking is a mistake that will be hard to correct if assumptions about cooperative threads are baked into the system early on. --------------enig41D2368DB3B58EB116E488AE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAk1H39gACgkQ17c2LVA10Vsz9QCg6pOWXxUQkRoAZuePwm3ch2jy l48An3oe1n3Lq6u9YnYHy0nwCUPMO8z1 =4tlB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig41D2368DB3B58EB116E488AE--