On Thu, 2015-01-29 at 16:41 -0600, Robby Findler wrote: > That is, I thought you could just create a separate thread that sync's > on E_b and then whenever you get a value from it, then the E_m would > just continue to produce that all the time. But I think you're saying > that wouldn't work?
The problem is that the auxiliary thread would always wait for the E_b, even when nobody is interested in the result anymore. Moreover, putting the wait in another thread would require the E_b to be thread safe. _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev