From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Guile in Emacs Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:40:35 -0600 Message-ID: References: <4B8147A9.7030504@gmail.com> <3vsk8ecg6a.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <873a0euot4.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <873a0cyv3r.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87aauiho3y.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <1271028837.6164.55.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1271102739.6067.38.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <8039yz34ka.fsf@tiny.isode.net> <1271173887.6067.53.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> Reply-To: Tom Tromey NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1271259672 25987 80.91.229.12 (14 Apr 2010 15:41:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bruce.stephens@isode.com, lord@emf.net, Christian Lynbech , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 14 17:41:10 2010 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 1O24iE-0006kB-2n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:41:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46322 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O24iC-0002cV-S2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:41:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O24i7-0002cQ-3a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:41:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37339 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O24i1-0002cG-QN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:41:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O24i0-0002ka-Hx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:40:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54592) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O24hy-0002jh-4k; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:40:54 -0400 Original-Received: from int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3EFecdk022210 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:40:38 -0400 Original-Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3EFecPU017023; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:40:38 -0400 Original-Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3EFeaVu007127; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:40:36 -0400 Original-Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id C931D3782DC; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:40:35 -0600 (MDT) X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:30:38 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.21 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:123644 Archived-At: John> Lastly, I'm not at all convinced Emacs Lisp needs multithreading. John> I would prefer a coarser model of process separation to allow John> things like Gnus to run in tandem with other tasks. I did consider this model. I even floated the idea on this list, though as I recall nobody replied. One thing worth noting is that you can experiment with this approach right now. I haven't tried but I think you can do it purely in elisp with no emacs changes required. Give it a try. If it is a better model, well, great, let's use it. John> I was just considering yesterday the truly scary-to-debug John> scenarios that come up when you realize dynamic variables can John> change mid-form That is true, but due to the nature of actually existing Emacs code I don't think it will be a problem in practice. Also: (1) this cannot happen with let-bound variables, only globals; and (2) this can already happen today via process filters (in limited scenarios, to be sure -- but the threading is cooperative, so the same applies). Tom