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: Very interesting analysis of "the state of Emacs" Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:00:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: <481693C3.70901@emf.net> <4816CDB6.6000006@pajato.com> <4817D79F.8040508@gmail.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1209592900 14514 80.91.229.12 (30 Apr 2008 22:01:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:01:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: spedrosa@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: dhruva Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 01 00:02:16 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 4.50) id 1JrKNA-0001A6-ES for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 May 2008 00:01:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54939 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JrKMT-0006MD-UQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:01:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JrKMQ-0006Ly-U2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:01:10 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JrKMP-0006Ll-Fe for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:01:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44950 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JrKMP-0006Li-CO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:01:09 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JrKMP-0003S3-4m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:01:09 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JrKM5-0006U3-6R; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:00:49 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from dhruva on Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:50:12 +0530) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:96243 Archived-At: If we are looking at concurrency, there is another paradigm based on maintaining multiple internal function call stacks which a scheduler can schedule in some fair fashion. I am talking of stackless Python implementation. You really do not have multiple threads but get simulated concurrency through stack switching. The idea is to get effective parallel execution for Lisp programs and redisplay. This doesn't mean using multiple threads at the C level. It means using whatever method is convenient.