From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs? Date: 04 Dec 2003 17:49:31 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87oevbes4h.fsf@emacswiki.org> <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> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1070578370 16722 80.91.224.253 (4 Dec 2003 22:52:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 04 23:52:47 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 1AS2L1-0007Hg-00 for ; Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:52:47 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AS2L1-0006YY-00 for ; Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:52:47 +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 1AS3GX-0003bT-Mp for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:52:13 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AS3Fu-0003Yr-NT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:51:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AS3FO-00031S-8H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:51:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [132.204.24.67] (helo=mercure.iro.umontreal.ca) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AS3FN-00030u-KV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:51:01 -0500 Original-Received: from vor.iro.umontreal.ca (vor.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.24.42]) by mercure.iro.umontreal.ca (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hB4MnW2m005613; Thu, 4 Dec 2003 17:49:32 -0500 Original-Received: by vor.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 2E92C3CFD9; Thu, 4 Dec 2003 17:49:32 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Ted Zlatanov In-Reply-To: <4nhe0ggv0u.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> Original-Lines: 24 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-DIRO-MailScanner: Found to be clean 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:18400 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:18400 > take too long. I understand all this can be hacked into place, but > is it really necessary to avoid multithreading so desperately? Nobody is avoiding it here. We're just explaining to you why nobody bothered to do it yet and why none of us feels the urge to do it: lots of work, unclear payoff. > Plus, I am pretty sure that when an application uses N processors > instead of one (as Emacs might with true preemptive multithreading) > there is at least some speed improvement. Your being pretty sure does not magically eliminate all the known counter examples. > (Xeons). I don't have benchmarks, sorry, but at least on Solaris the > performance of a machine increases by at least 80% with each > additional SPARC processor. Such naive sweeping claims would tend to ruin your credibility, I'm afraid. Yes, things can be made to work well, but do you have an idea of the amount of work it takes to do that ? Stefan