On Sep 2, 2011, at 2:26 PM, John J Barton wrote:
> I'm pretty puzzled by this discussion and I'm guessing other folks might be
> puzzled as well. Since I understood node fibers as "thread for Node", the
> discussion I read is:
>
> /be: You can have threads!
I did not say that. Remember, threads suck.
Generators are not threads. Generators are shallow one-shot continuations.
They do not even imply an event loop turn per yield. But they are co-expressive
with, and more primitive than, deferred/async functions (now that we have
PEP-380 style return e; from generator body).
With generators one can build up a variety of async libraries that do not
require manual CPS conversion via the dreaded function-expression nest.
> Mikeal: We don't want threads!
Again the issue is not threads. It is what idiom or keyword signals the reader
that a voluntary suspension point has been reached and later or deeper-nested
code runs in a different turn (or *may* run in a different turn).
Node.JS is a single-threaded server and always will be. No threads, not even
cooperatively scheduled.
> If I'm on the right track, then I should understand how this relates to
> proxies. But I don't. Any hints?
Proxies are handy for making promises have an API that looks like plain old
object API. obj.foo instead of obj.get("foo"), etc.
/be_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
