From: tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Cc: rlb@defaultvalue.org, mvo@zagadka.ping.de, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Recursive mutexes?
Date: 26 Oct 2002 16:26:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8765vook7c.fsf@becket.becket.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200210262242.PAA26787@morrowfield.regexps.com>
Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com> writes:
> In my "dream scheme" system, I'm thinking they aren't worth the
> effort. They slow down access to the store and complicate
> programming. I don't even want to think about how to reconcile them
> with continuations, dynamic-wind, or fluids.
It seems to me that we should not decide that a problem is too hard to
solve well before trying.
> I do want multiple interpreters (without a shared store) in separate
> threads. I do want low-level routines running in separate threads
> (e.g., give a CPU to I/O or to reving cellular automata generations).
> But I'm having trouble seeing Scheme semantics as other than "optimal
> for SISD".
How will these different interpreters share data?
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-26 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-26 20:35 Recursive mutexes? Marius Vollmer
2002-10-26 21:39 ` Neil Jerram
2002-10-27 0:03 ` Marius Vollmer
2002-10-27 1:20 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2002-10-27 12:36 ` Marius Vollmer
2002-10-27 7:55 ` Neil Jerram
2002-10-27 18:33 ` Rob Browning
2002-10-26 22:16 ` Rob Browning
2002-10-26 22:29 ` Rob Browning
2002-10-26 22:42 ` Tom Lord
2002-10-26 23:26 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG [this message]
2002-10-26 23:35 ` Tom Lord
2002-10-26 23:50 ` Tom Lord
2002-10-27 1:18 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2002-10-26 22:47 ` Tom Lord
2002-10-27 8:33 ` Neil Jerram
2002-10-27 17:21 ` Tom Lord
2002-10-27 0:35 ` Marius Vollmer
2002-10-27 4:36 ` Rob Browning
2002-10-27 11:32 ` Marius Vollmer
2002-10-27 18:44 ` Rob Browning
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8765vook7c.fsf@becket.becket.net \
--to=tb@becket.net \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mvo@zagadka.ping.de \
--cc=rlb@defaultvalue.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).