[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Concurrency, again
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Concurrency, again |
Date: |
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 08:48:26 +0300 |
> From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 17:01:24 -0400
> Cc: address@hidden
>
> It would not be necessary to allow two ordinary Lisp programs to run
> in parallel. In other words, it would be ok if Emacs allowed only one
> ordinary program at any time -- alongside any number of special
> asynchronous programs.
That's what the code on the "concurrency" branch of the Emacs
repository does -- except that (1) it doesn't allow you to create
special asynchronous programs at all, and (2) it is capable of
switching to another ordinary Lisp program when the current one is
waiting for something (e.g., keyboard input or subprocess output), or
explicitly yields to another.
- Re: Concurrency, again, (continued)
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: Concurrency, again, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/15
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/15
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/16
- Re: Concurrency, again, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/16
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/17
- Re: Concurrency, again, Philipp Stephani, 2016/10/25
- Re: Concurrency, again, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/10/25
- Re: Concurrency, again, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Ted Zlatanov, 2016/10/14