On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 09:42:08PM +0200, John Bäckstrand wrote:
> >You are of course welcome to suggest ways to decrease the number of
> >threads because - as you have mentioned quite correctly - threads are
> >indeed expensive. Unfortunately in most cases it's either "use a thread"
> >or "write several hundred lines of code and not use a thread."
> 
> I generally loathe threads, I've written several non-blocking C++ 
> applications which are single-threaded. They are both clean (basically 
> event-driven, althouh on a slightly low level), efficient and very 
> easily debuggable (no locking/synchronization problems).

And inefficient on modern hardware.
> 
> NIO in Java is a weird beast though, I can do this stuff easily in C++, 
> but NIO is hard to use. I also dont know if NIO is applicable to UDP?

NIO is a major PITA. But UDP means we don't need to use NIO.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to