From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Helmut Eller Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer' Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 17:28:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4D46E75E.7080503@harpegolden.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296591861 22617 80.91.229.12 (1 Feb 2011 20:24:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 20:24:21 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 01 21:24:17 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 1PkMlq-0007tN-02 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 21:24:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41616 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PkMln-0007sh-GH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 15:24:11 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37710 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PkJSP-0008D3-TS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:52:00 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PkJ5W-0000fX-Er for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:28:19 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:54021) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PkJ5W-0000fI-9M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:28:18 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PkJ5T-00004y-IY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 17:28:15 +0100 Original-Received: from dial-176241.pool.broadband44.net ([212.46.176.241]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 17:28:15 +0100 Original-Received: from eller.helmut by dial-176241.pool.broadband44.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 17:28:15 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 18 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-176241.pool.broadband44.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:KbFdxcEb8JeWHcgn5EF9I8apTYk= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:135431 Archived-At: * Stefan Monnier [2011-02-01 15:43] writes: >> Or, instead of the locks-and-condition-variables approach, go the CSP >> route and have channels and channel-select. This idea is making a >> comeback, maybe it would fit well in Emacs Lisp. > > Erlang-style concurrency is nice and clean, but I'm not sure it'll > integrate well with existing code which stomps over a global state all > the time. This doesn't mean it won't work. If we can make it work > something like "one agent per buffer" and turn `set-buffer' into a kind > of message maybe we could get some good results, but it seems tricky. Erlang-style concurrency would be awesome. Where can I vote for it :-) Is there a way to evaluate the different approaches against each other? What are the uses cases where concurrency should be used in the future? Helmut