On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:00, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Aaron Sherman writes:

> > Well, more to the point, autothreading of junctions will hit the wall of
> > Parrot duping the interpreter. That's probably not something you want to
> > suffer just to resolve a junction, is it?
> What?  Why will it do that?

Why? Well, you can read what Dan wrote, 'cause I'm sure not going to
pretend I'm enough of a threads programmer to have an educated opinion:

        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.
        -Dan Sugalski / 14 Apr 2005

I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing, but people on THIS list seem to
keep pretending that threading will be light-weight, and unless I'm
misunderstanding what "each thread has its own interpreter" means (and
Dan confirmed it in pretty clear terms when I asked), that's simply not
the case.

Dan's terse followup is at:


Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith
"It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback

Reply via email to