From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What's the problem? (Was: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?) Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 14:32:09 -0500 Organization: =?koi8-r?q?=F4=C5=CF=C4=CF=D2=20=FA=CC=C1=D4=C1=CE=CF=D7?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <4nr7zd6b46.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> References: <20031117040607.C6C5D79B72@server2.messagingengine.com> <87ekvpx18d.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> <4nad6cikxy.fsf@holmes.bwh.harvard.edu> <4nllpt3hr3.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> <5bad69zd43.fsf@lister.roxen.com> <4noeuon378.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> <4ny8tsgxy6.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> <4nhe0ggv0u.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> <4nk75bwjaf.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> <4nsmjv8d32.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> <4nu14b6q33.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard. NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1071000923 15624 80.91.224.253 (9 Dec 2003 20:15:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 20:15:23 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 09 21:15:20 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 1AToGO-00049Q-00 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 21:15:20 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AToGN-0007oB-00 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 21:15:19 +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 1AToz0-0002s8-4Z for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 16:01:26 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1ATowi-0002UO-8u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:59:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AToh3-0006rZ-2M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:43:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [80.91.224.249] (helo=main.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1ATogX-0006j6-3k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:42:21 -0500 Original-Received: from root by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1ATnj5-0006cR-00 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 20:40:55 +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 1ATnbN-0006Wx-00 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 20:32:57 +0100 Original-Received: from news by sea.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1ATnbN-0002Zi-00 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 20:32:57 +0100 Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (usg-unix-v) Cancel-Lock: sha1:bKLQMm25aiESpOk/UTelMlMD6ic= 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:18579 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:18579 On 08 Dec 2003, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca wrote: > The event-drive API is available right now (see process-filters and > run-with-idle-timer), but people don't like it too much. Especially > writing background tasks using run-with-idle-timer is inconvenient. > The next step is to provide a simple multithreading model which will > simply allow the same as the current event-driven API but more > conveniently (i.e. something like cooperative multithreading, or > even with a bit of preemption, but probably all the switching done > by hand in the elisp interpreter: no concurrency inside the C code). I would be glad to help with any of this, to the best of my abilities. Do you think it's better as a patch, separate branch, or built into the core? What can I do to help? > As for true parallelism, as I said the only use for it is speed, so > I don't see it as particularly important. But maybe within 10-20 > years things will have changed a little. In 10-20 years we'll all be running Emacs neural implants :) Thanks Ted