01-05-04 17.31, skrev Benjamin Sugars p� [EMAIL PROTECTED] f�ljande:
> On Fri, 4 May 2001, Alan Burlison wrote:
>
>> We might actually be better expending effort in providing a proper event
>> loop in perl - this is more likely to be achievable within the strictures of
>> the existing perl5 implementation, and if we are going to end up locking
>> everything anyway, it may not end up being any slower.
>
> Agreed. There are many other things with a higher utility/work ratio.
>
> This is not meant to denigrate the hard work that Artur is doing. I just
> don't see ever being able to access any more than a subset of Perl from
> threaded perl. I hope I'm wrong.
>
> Cheers,
> -Ben
Even if so, I might be happy to use that subset of Perl in a threaded
enviroment. Frankly I don't write code that deals alot with the system
information, mostly my work is in IO and dealing with datastreams. I would
be happy if this subset worked properly in threaded mode. I am going to try
and get this to work for the subset of Perl I am using, I think that a group
of people working in the same problem domain as I do will have uses of this
threading.
Perl does have an event loop, infact it has several of them. And I don't see
how a event loop is going to help, one of the main reasons I am doing this
is to run POE sessions in different threads.
If this is such a big problem, then mod_perl is in for major breakage as
mod_perl uses ithreads for mod_perl 2.0 and Apache 2.0, mod_perl is from my
understand of major importance for perl, and if it will break badly then
something needs to be done.
Artur
