Re: threads!

2001-10-05 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 04:39:15PM -, kurian kattukaren wrote: > > >>"kurian kattukaren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> Will this do for schedule_timeout(). > >BSG replied: > >It's not the best way. > > >The "canonical" way to write timeout-like functions is >to keep track of a queue

threads!

2001-10-04 Thread kurian kattukaren
>>"kurian kattukaren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Will this do for schedule_timeout(). >BSG replied: >It's not the best way. >The "canonical" way to write timeout-like functions is >to keep track of a queue of >timout requests, and have a >thread whose job is to sleep until the top i

Re: SV: Threads

2000-12-24 Thread John Leuner
> Just a final note. > Mabye you are not interested in *completely* transparent threading? > Mabye you just would like threads to be managed by the OS wherever it might > be suitable? > > Start to check out BeOS. I don't really know much about Be, but it claims to > do

Re: Threads

2000-12-20 Thread Mark Seaborn
It requires you to say when separate threads should be started, but apart from that the flow of data is handled transparently -- threads will suspend until a value they need becomes available. -- Mark Seaborn - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://members.xoom.com/mseaborn/ - ``Water boils at

Re: SV: Threads

2000-12-19 Thread Daniel Solaz
Svanberg Liss wrote: > Start to check out BeOS. I don't really know much about Be, but it claims to > do just this, so it might be worth a look. Not really. It's just that library functions may spawn their own threads when needed, but that doesn't mean you don't have t

RE: Threads

2000-12-19 Thread Roberto Diaz
intelligent way, based upon information added to the object in order to be thread-safe, creating threads if it can or just jumping to another task if something is too slow.. Well I know this is not serious.. ;) but it

Re: Threads

2000-12-18 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
urd itself. The Hurd could make use of such a functionality and replace threads usage with your new thing if it existed. But it doesn't, so we don't worry about it. Implementing such is not the focus of the Hurd project at all. Also, it doesn't do away with the need for pthreads s

SV: Threads

2000-12-18 Thread Svanberg Liss
Just a final note. Mabye you are not interested in *completely* transparent threading? Mabye you just would like threads to be managed by the OS wherever it might be suitable? Start to check out BeOS. I don't really know much about Be, but it claims to do just this, so it might be worth a

RE: Threads

2000-12-18 Thread Svanberg Liss
f hidden mutexes and such, but I think this breaks something in the C spec, and you would probably end up with an incredibly inefficient code. So, the first thing you'll have to do, is just to design a new byte-granular-MMU, a new microprocessor that manages function calls as threads and handles the

Re: Threads

2000-12-18 Thread Roberto Diaz
> 1) Write and publish in the lists > 1.1) a proposal of what exactly I wished to accomplish > 1.2) what exactly needed to be changed in detail > 1.3) an estimate of the manpower and time required > 1.4) a justification of what one wishes to accomplish for t

Re: Threads

2000-12-16 Thread Roberto Diaz
> Wow, this is a very big question - bigger than this mailing list. I don't > think this is the place to discuss if threads are useful. And almost > everyone agree threads are *very* convenient for using in server and client > programs. Actually everywhere. Without thread

Re: Threads

2000-12-15 Thread Jim Franklin
Hi Roberto, I sense the frustration in your request so I'll attempt to set your mind at ease if I can. As someone mentioned: 1) they're a readily understood programming concept also: 2) cthreads are already implemented 3) time and manpower 4) the structure of the hurd project I think the

Re: Threads

2000-12-15 Thread Ognyan Kulev
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 12:05:09PM +0100, Roberto Diaz wrote: > Why do we really need threads? Wow, this is a very big question - bigger than this mailing list. I don't think this is the place to discuss if threads are useful. And almost everyone agree threads are *very* convenient f

Re: Threads

2000-12-15 Thread Roberto Diaz
> Hi Nasos > The hurd uses cthreads at this time. There are plans to implement pthreads > but that is at some time in the future. Can somebody tell me what is the need to keep having that abstraction? Why do we really need threads? For expample.. 1.-In a single-proccesor machine.

Re: Threads

2000-12-14 Thread Jim Franklin
Hi Nasos The hurd uses cthreads at this time. There are plans to implement pthreads but that is at some time in the future. Jim - Original Message - From: "Athanasios Kinalis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 1:50 AM S

Threads

2000-12-14 Thread Athanasios Kinalis
Hi, Is there a pthread implementation for the Hurd? If not are there any other libraries to provide thread support for applications? Thanks, Nasos __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yaho