From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Threads in emacs implementation Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:40:31 -0400 Message-ID: References: <6dbd4d0005060619227dd41364@mail.gmail.com> <87vf4oaft8.fsf@zemdatav.stor.no-ip.org> <4nd5quav0o.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4nll5btxv7.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4nvf4eqnec.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4nzmtpqdlp.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4n7jgo3nxb.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ll537e13.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1119412856 29352 80.91.229.2 (22 Jun 2005 04:00:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 04:00:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tzz@lifelogs.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 22 06:00:55 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DkwPo-0004sg-4I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 06:00:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DkwWM-0000ZA-AK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:07:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DkwQ3-0006Ag-Ti for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:00:56 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DkwPG-0005yy-M1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:00:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DkwPE-0005nz-7g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:00:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DkwA8-0002eN-HO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:44:28 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1Dkw6J-0005SM-OW; Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:40:31 -0400 Original-To: Nic Ferrier In-reply-to: <87ll537e13.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> (message from Nic Ferrier on Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:36:40 +0100) 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:39270 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:39270 As I understand it such an implementation would not take advantage of the new hardware that supports multi-threading, eg: multi-core x86 processors. I am not sure that case is important, or that it would outweigh the slowness of all variable accesses. I don't think that Emacs will often have multiple threads actually trying to run. If multiple users are typing on one Emacs, only occasionally will they both run nontrivial commands at once.