[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Threads and asyncs
From: |
NIIBE Yutaka |
Subject: |
Re: Threads and asyncs |
Date: |
Thu, 5 Sep 2002 07:30:43 +0900 (JST) |
Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Asyncronous signals are also a clean way to break up a dead-lock.
Well, yup, it's convenient to break up dead-lock by some interruption
scheme. That's true. However, I think that it's not UNIX signal and
its signal handler, in general. Definitely not.
I think that we're talking about Guile language support for UNIX
siganls and threads. In this case, we need to think about the
semantics of UNIX signals with thread library. Please refer some
thread programming introduction(s) for UNIX signal.
http://www.serpentine.com/~bos/threads-faq/
Bil Lewis and Daniel J. Berg, Multithreaded Programming with Pthread
Or else, looking the implementation such as Python would help.
--
- Re: Threads and asyncs, (continued)
- Re: Threads and asyncs, Tom Lord, 2002/09/04
- Re: Threads and asyncs, Lynn Winebarger, 2002/09/05
- RnRS process/history/documentation (was Re: Threads and asyncs), Lynn Winebarger, 2002/09/02
- Re: Threads and asyncs, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/09/02
Re: Threads and asyncs, Marius Vollmer, 2002/09/03