> Does it make sense to keep the scheduler in core then? Or in other > words, do we need to have an "internal/inofficial/##sys#secret#" > thread api for it to make sense?
The threading implementation does not have to be identical with the scheduling mechanism. The latter needs to be embedded deep into the core system to be fast, the former should by variable. It is possible to replace the scheduler as well, I guess, but this would require a redesign of the interface between error- and exception handling facilities and other stuff that interacts with multiple execution contexts in subtle ways. > > I don't fully understand the implications of the srfi-18 removal. > > Please enlighten me on that! One reason is that the API sucks. The other is that CHICKEN is flexible enough to have multiple threading implementations, and the general idea is to streamline the core system. From a user perspective nothing should change, if that is what you mean by "implications". felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
