On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:23 AM, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 6:48 PM, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Does Plan 9 Port help? I mean, libthread on Plan 9 Port alone could be >> worth a ton to me in some situations. >> Concurrent programming for the win? > > probably not for this community. When we had plan9port in xcpu we got > nothing but complaints. This in spite of the fact that some things are > impossible to scale with 5000 posix threads, and easy to scale with > 5000 plan 9 style threads.
Why not use rsc's libtask instead? It would avoid most of the p9p baggage (which certainly it is not designed to make it easy for people to build apps that depend on it). libtask is small enough that it could easily be distributed together with xcpu. Just an ignorant suggestion by someone that is not even clear on what xcpu does. uriel
