On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Michael Bacarella wrote:
>
> Q: Why do we need threads?
> A: Because on some operating systems, task switches are expensive.
No. threads share variable and code memory, processes do not. And
sometimes it can make your life a lot easier. Even if you can use things
such as SHM or so.
> Q: So, threads are a hack to get around operating systems that suck?
> A: Basically.
I don't agree.
> Q: So, why must Linux support threads?
> A1: : |
> A2: So other programs can be easily ported to Linux!
>
> That can already happen. It's not the *best* implementation. It's
> not as fast as it can be. But it works. And that's all it should do. If
> you're not happy, cope.
>
> "But threads on this system are faster than on Linux!"
>
> The fact that the system implements threads speaks enough about
> it's capabilities. ie, it's trying hard to suck less. So, from my POV,
> we're looking to make Linux suck more by effectively emulating systems
> that are trying to suck less.
>
> But, I've never done anything worthwhile for Linux, so take this for what
> it's worth, from an asshole.
> -MB
Igmar
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
