[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Concurrency
From: |
Ken Raeburn |
Subject: |
Re: Concurrency |
Date: |
Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:25:32 -0400 |
On Mar 28, 2010, at 17:17, Tom Tromey wrote:
> * The current code makes no attempt to portable, it relies on POSIX
> threads and the GNU __thread extension. This is not too hard to fix.
> I think it is reasonably important to keep __thread on systems that
> support it, for performance.
From what I understand, porting to Windows should be easy enough. "A simple
matter of coding."
Dealing with __thread shouldn't be hard if it's not used pervasively, so
pthread_{get,set}specific calls can be used in its place.
> * Suppose you have existing elisp that creates a process with a filter,
> and the filter changes a let-bound variable, and the "outer" elisp
> blocks in sit-for waiting for the filter to do its thing. Nothing in
> the current code guarantees that the process filter will be run in the
> "correct" thread.
That may be a reason to force the filter to run in the same thread that created
it. Perhaps process filters could be run at thread-switch opportunities like
'yield', too? (And vice versa -- perhaps calls that permit the running of
process filters should also permit thread switching?)
Sounds like this is coming along nicely!
Ken
- Re: Concurrency, (continued)
- Re: Concurrency, Giuseppe Scrivano, 2010/03/29
- Re: Concurrency, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/29
- Re: Concurrency, Tom Tromey, 2010/03/28
- Re: Concurrency, Daniel Colascione, 2010/03/28
- Re: Concurrency, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/28
- Re: Concurrency, Tom Tromey, 2010/03/28
- Re: Concurrency, Tom Tromey, 2010/03/28
- Re: Concurrency,
Ken Raeburn <=
- Re: Concurrency, Tom Tromey, 2010/03/29
- Re: Concurrency, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/29
- gsoc for concurrent Emacs? (was: Concurrency), Ted Zlatanov, 2010/03/31
- Re: Concurrency, Giuseppe Scrivano, 2010/03/28
- Re: Concurrency, Daniel Colascione, 2010/03/28
- Re: Concurrency, Tom Tromey, 2010/03/28