dsimcha Wrote: > > This is great for super-scalable concurrency, the kind you need for things > like > servers, but what about the case where you need concurrency mostly to exploit > data > parallelism in a multicore environment? Are we considering things like > parallel > foreach, map, reduce, etc. to be orthogonal to what's being discussed here, > or do > they fit together somehow?
I think it probably depends on the relative efficiency of a message passing approach to one using a thread pool for the small-N case (particularly for very large datasets). If message passing can come close to the thread pool in performance then it's clearly preferable. It may come down to whether pass by reference is allowed in some instances. It's always possible to use casts to bypass checking and pass by reference anyway, but it would be nice if this weren't necessary.
