I'm writing a Reversi/Othello game engine in Racket as a learning exercise. Since my macbook pro has 4 cores and 8 hardware threads, I'd like to see what sort of speedup I can get by parallelizing it.
I read through chapter 20 of the Racket Guide, and I *think* places may be more suitable than futures for this task due to the fact that each compute unit will be allocating memory for the next set of moves, etc. Does that sound right? I suppose one place per core makes sense. I'm not sure if hyperthreading warrants one place per thread. In this case, I actually don't mind implementing both a futures and a places engine to compare since I'm just trying to get better at Racket, but I'm curious about the specific limitations of futures. On a related note, are there any plans for other parallelizing mechanisms in the future such as Erlang style processes? Thanks, Brian -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
