From: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>
Cc: Carl Witty <cwitty@newtonlabs.com>,
guile-devel@gnu.org, Marius Vollmer <m.vollmer@ping.de>
Subject: Re: scm_i_fraction_reduce thread safety
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 20:35:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ekti7dka.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874quhdlfm.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> (Rob Browning's message of "Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:24:45 -0600")
Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> writes:
> In any case, do we have a "current plan" with respect to threading,
I don't have one ready, but I do very much want to have one before
1.8. I need to decide for myself whether I would want to go for full
concurrency or for restricting us to a one-thread-at-a-time model.
Full concurrency is not a nice-model to program for,
one-thread-at-a-time wont be able to take advantage of multiple
processors.
> and on a related note, do we have any plans to consider anything other
> than our current one interpreter per-process arrangement?
In my view, it doesn't make much sense to talk about 'the interpreter'
in the context of Guile. Our 'interpreter' is just the function eval.
What would separate interpreters mean? Separate heaps?
--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-29 19:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-11 11:43 scm_i_fraction_reduce thread safety Bill Schottstaedt
2003-12-11 19:19 ` Carl Witty
2003-12-12 12:11 ` Bill Schottstaedt
2003-12-12 15:04 ` Paul Jarc
2003-12-12 23:23 ` Kevin Ryde
2004-01-10 22:38 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-10 23:29 ` Kevin Ryde
2004-01-11 1:31 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-12 0:51 ` Kevin Ryde
2004-01-12 5:22 ` Richard Todd
2004-01-14 21:09 ` Kevin Ryde
2004-01-21 0:03 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-21 0:00 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-21 3:11 ` Carl Witty
2004-01-21 21:06 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-27 22:15 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-01-27 23:24 ` Rob Browning
2004-01-29 19:35 ` Marius Vollmer [this message]
2004-01-29 20:32 ` Rob Browning
2004-01-30 14:45 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2004-02-01 18:49 ` Andy Wingo
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-09 20:39 Kevin Ryde
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=87ekti7dka.fsf@zagadka.ping.de \
--to=mvo@zagadka.de \
--cc=cwitty@newtonlabs.com \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=m.vollmer@ping.de \
/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).