> > But Parrot has continuations. Doesn't this gives me (cooperative) > > microthreads? (with a little work on my part). > > Sure...
So these would be real cheap right? Time and space overheads similar to regular procedure calls? > The world could also use a pony. And a lollypop. :) Um, I think this is off topic - I better check the charter :) > ...whether it happens depends on a number of engineering and > personnel factors--while nice, it's not as important as other things. For me this is must-have, so I may be in the mood to contribute... Do you have any rough handle on the size of the task? Would the learning curve be painful for a newcomer? To return to the general thread of this, er, thread, which was not specifically about, um, threads... Let's say I have decided to build on top of a VM, is Parrot the right VM? Given that I'm not deeply into all this as of right now, I'm thinking probably yes, simply because Parrot seems to be the only VM project that is: 1) Built for dynamic scripting languages from the ground up. and 2) Built to support a range of such languages (and interop between them) Any VM that cannot claim (2) seems scary as a target for a new language. Agree? True there are many languages for the JVM, but if you look at Java bytecode (no function pointers!), it's pretty clear that performace is directly proportional to conformance to Java's object model. Fire away! Tom.
