Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 23:46:48 +0100
From: tim.bu...@pobox.com
To: faw...@gmail.com
CC: ben-goldb...@hotmail.com; perl6-language@perl.org
Subject: Lessons to learn from ithreads (was: threads?)
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 03:42:00PM +0200, Leon Timmermans wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:52:00PM -0400, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
From: tim.bu...@pobox.com
So I'd like to use this sub-thread to try to identify when lessons we
can learn from ithreads. My initial thoughts are:
- Don't clone a live interpreter.
Start a new
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 09:57:26AM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Leon Timmermans faw...@gmail.com wrote:
Continuations and fibers are incredibly useful and should be easy to
implement on parrot/rakudo but they aren't really concurrency. They're
a solution to a
Earlier, Leon Timmermans wrote:
: * Code sharing is actually quite nice. Loading Moose separately in a
: hundred threads is not. This is not trivial though, Perl being so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/15/10 10:22 , B. Estrade wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but are continuations the same thing as
co-routines, or is it more primitive than that? Also, doesn't this
really just allow context switching outside of the knowledge of a
kernel thread,
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Tim Bunce tim.bu...@pobox.com wrote:
...
Another important issue here is portability of concepts across
implementations of perl6. I'd guess that starting a thread with a fresh
interpreter is likely to be supportable across more implementations than
starting a
Damian (), Matt ():
Perhaps we need to think more Perlishly and reframe the entire question.
Not: What threading model do we need?, but: What kinds of non-sequential
programming tasks do we want to make easy...and how would we like to be
able to specify those tasks?
I watched a presentation
On Oct 12, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
Perhaps we need to think more Perlishly and reframe the entire question.
Not: What threading model do we need?, but: What kinds of non-sequential
programming tasks do we want to make easy...and how would we like to be
able to specify those
Stefan ():
A methodical is an operator which syntactically behaves as a method but is
subject to scoping rules. Methodicals are defined using the ordinary method
keyword, qualified with my or our. (TODO: This seems the most natural syntax
to me, but it conflicts with existing usage. Which
