On Jan 14, 2011, at 11:05 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: > Well, I'm for the library. I haven't done much with concurrent > programming, but it looks like it would be usable in more general > cases. I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but here are some > thoughts. > > It doesn't make use of std.concurrency, would it make sense to build > it off of message passing?
Possibly some of it, but portions of std.parallelism are to solve problems where message passing isn't ideal from a performance perspective. > I believe that std.concurrency's interface is meant to scale up to > clusters, would this be doable for std.parallelism? It should be. As long as the existing interface will allow things to expand in that direction then I think we're good. I designed std.concurrency with inter-process messaging in mind, even though it hasn't been implemented yet. _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
