At 10:44 AM -0400 4/14/05, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 09:11, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:03 PM -0400 4/13/05, Michael Walter wrote:
>On 4/13/05, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> All security is done on a per-interpreter basis. (really on a
>> per-thread basis, but since we're one-thread per interpreter it's
>> essentially the same thing)
>Just to get me back on track: Does this mean that when you spawn a
>thread, a separate interpreter runs in/manages that thread, or
>something else?
We'd decided that each thread has its own interpreter. Parrot doesn't
get any lighter-weight than an interpreter, since trying to have
multiple threads of control share an interpreter seems to be a good
way to die a horrible death.
So to follow up on Michael's question: does this mean that you spawn a
new thread, instance an interpreter, and then begin executing shared
code?
Yes.
What about data?
Data needs to be explicitly shared.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------it's like this-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
