From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark H Weaver Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: 01/02: Re-implement (ice-9 streams) in terms of (srfi srfi-41) Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 19:54:11 -0400 Message-ID: <878uefbbrw.fsf@netris.org> References: <20150309125201.7033.46022@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <8761a81brb.fsf@netris.org> <87ioe8x7ep.fsf@pobox.com> <874mp3wwia.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1427673255 4955 80.91.229.3 (29 Mar 2015 23:54:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 23:54:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 30 01:54:07 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YcN1o-00051A-H1 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 01:54:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58656 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcN1n-0008E8-8f for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 19:54:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48249) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcN1k-0008E3-2Q for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 19:54:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcN1g-0004C7-U6 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 19:54:00 -0400 Original-Received: from world.peace.net ([50.252.239.5]:53734) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YcN1g-0004BU-Qf; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 19:53:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [10.1.10.78] (helo=jojen) by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YcN1Q-0003XW-AM; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 19:53:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <874mp3wwia.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Sun, 29 Mar 2015 19:20:45 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 50.252.239.5 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:17706 Archived-At: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > Perhaps the right thing would be to just fix SRFI-45 promises to be > thread-safe, no? This would slow down the fastest implementation of promises we could hope for by an order of magnitude, at least on non-Intel platforms. This in turn would severely limit the set of applications for which SRFI-45 promises and SRFI-41 streams would be efficient enough to consider. If most of the Guile community wants to persue this strategy of building thread synchronization into primitives that could otherwise be extremely cheap, then I'd better withdraw from this community. Mark