On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:19 AM, David McClain < d...@refined-audiometrics.com> wrote:
> That is not the same as OCaml's architecture, and so OCaml can implement > about 90% of CML but that last 10% might kill your dreams. CML likes to > spawn potential handlers, of which only one will get the go ahead. The > others are expected to die, after possibly cleaning up state. > So which 10% of the Event module is poorly implemented? Or is it that the Event module doesn't have a spawn function and relies on the Thread module? Is it fixable (could a CML module be created for OCaml that faithfully implements the run-time described in Reppy's book)? I thought I read some details, recently, which described CML threads implemented as continuations rather than system threads, which made them inexpensive (relative to OS threads) to create. I'll have to go through my blog lists to see where I read that. Thanks for your insights! -- Rich Google Reader: https://www.google.com/reader/shared/rich.neswold Jabber ID: r...@neswold.homeunix.net
_______________________________________________ Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management: http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
