[email protected] wrote on 04/02/2012 11:05:42 PM:
> From: Martijn Verburg
> To: Da Vinci Machine Project
> Date: 04/02/2012 11:14 PM
> Subject: Re: Coroutines in JDK8++?
> Sent by: [email protected]
>
> Hi Mark,
> On 3 April 2012 00:40, Mark Roos wrote:
&
Hi!
Am 2012-04-02 23:40, schrieb Mark Roos:
A question I have on your coro implementation is just how sensitive it
is to changes in HotSpot. I am planning to give it a go and am wondering
if I need to be a Hotspot expert as well ( in case it breaks ).
It is independent of most subsystems, for e
Hi Mark,
On 3 April 2012 00:40, Mark Roos wrote:
> Hi Martijn
>
> If the effort meets my needs I'll be there to help. My goal is a full
> implementation
> of Smalltalk on the JVM. One thing I need is the ability to manipulate a
> suspended
> thread from the object side. For this Lukas' work s
Hi Martizn
If the effort meets my needs I'll be there to help. My goal is a full
implementation
of Smalltalk on the JVM. One thing I need is the ability to manipulate a
suspended
thread from the object side. For this Lukas' work seems a good fit.
My concern is that (as John Rose points out )
Hi Lukas
A question I have on your coro implementation is just how sensitive it
is to changes in HotSpot. I am planning to give it a go and am wondering
if I need to be a Hotspot expert as well ( in case it breaks ).
On the same topic I recall that you build a small object code piece to
give
ac
> In this case I think the suitable thing to do would be to coordinate work
> around
> your existing patch via some sort of OSS project and look at all of the
> aspects
> that would need to be covered in order for it to be accepted into the
> OpenJDK.
> For example, a lot of thought will need to go
Hi Lukas/Charlie,
Basically we're trying to get more people involved in the OpenJDK as well
as
helping projects like coroutines get into a good shape for possible
inclusion into
the OpenJDK. This includes helping out with JEP and JSR processes as a
project matures.
In this case I think the suitab
Getting coro into JDK8 is obviously not possible now, but the sooner
we get started the more likely we can shoot for JDK9. That needs
people with cycles. I have some, and I'm willing to help, but I do not
know how the JSR process works (yes, I should learn) and I'm not
enough of a VM-level expert t
Hi,
I've last updated the coro patch beginning of December, and people have
been compiling and using it at least mid-February.
It is quite experimental, but it's complete enough to prove the
usefulness of coroutines on a JVM.
One important step towards coroutines on Java is a JSR, I guess...
Hi Mark,
Last I heard there was an old experimental patch by Lucas? . I
know that we have some very interested people in the London Java User
Group (aka the LJC). We've listed it as one of the Advanced projects
we'll be looking into as part of the global Adopt OpenJDK program, so
if you have some
On Apr 21, 2011, at 12:28 PM, Mark Roos wrote:
> If so do I have to do something to enable them?
>
> If not are they in b138?
>
> They look like a good fit for my Smalltalk processes
The coro stuff is probably a good fit for you.
The 292 work is probably stepping on coro's toes in the mlvm
At 12:28 PM -0700 4/21/11, Mark Roos wrote:
>Are Lucas' coroutines supported in the latest mac build?
>
>If so do I have to do something to enable them?
>
>If not are they in b138?
>
>They look like a good fit for my Smalltalk processes
Last time I tried including the coro patch with mlvm compil
And I'm almost exclusively interested in coro :)
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Lukas Stadler wrote:
> Yes, the coro patch should be applied without continuations.
> It doesn't need any of the continuation functionality - maybe I should
> make that more clear in the series file...
> - Lukas
>
>
Yes, the coro patch should be applied without continuations.
It doesn't need any of the continuation functionality - maybe I should
make that more clear in the series file...
- Lukas
On 11.03.2010 12:58, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 17:04 +0100, Lukas Stadler wrote:
>
>>
On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 17:04 +0100, Lukas Stadler wrote:
> Hi everybody!
>
> As you've probably seen I've pushed a new coroutine implementation into
> the repository.
I'm just rebasing the mlvm patches to the latest code drop and HotSpot's
coro.patch does not apply cleanly on top of the other pat
I'm planning on spending a bunch of time next week on MLVM, especially
invokedynamic updates for JRuby and trying out coroutines and tail
calls. So I'll let you know what I see :)
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Lukas Stadler wrote:
> Hi everybody!
>
> As you've probably seen I've pushed a new
Support millions of coroutines.
So if it's possible to have a choice, that sounds great, but if not, choose
a more scalable implementation if only one can be done. Making coroutines
effectively as cheap as other objects for managing state opens up their
usage, and it would also be competitive in t
Yes, the best will be to have the choice, i.e two different Java objects
or a way to select if you want to share the stack between coroutine or not.
Rémi
Attila Szegedi a écrit :
> As coroutines are often employed in situations where massive parallelism is
> desired, I believe that the approach
As coroutines are often employed in situations where massive parallelism is
desired, I believe that the approach that allows millions of them is the better
choice, if a single choice has to be made.
That said, if there is a meaningful way to have the programmer choose between
the two models (or
19 matches
Mail list logo
