On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:00, Luke Palmer wrote: > Aaron Sherman writes: > > Well, more to the point, autothreading of junctions will hit the wall of > > Parrot duping the interpreter. That's probably not something you want to > > suffer just to resolve a junction, is it? > > What? Why will it do that?
Why? Well, you can read what Dan wrote, 'cause I'm sure not going to pretend I'm enough of a threads programmer to have an educated opinion: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/perl.perl6.internals/msg/18b86bff49cac5a0?dmode=source We'd decided that each thread has its own interpreter. Parrot doesn't get any lighter-weight than an interpreter, since trying to have multiple threads of control share an interpreter seems to be a good way to die a horrible death. -Dan Sugalski / 14 Apr 2005 I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing, but people on THIS list seem to keep pretending that threading will be light-weight, and unless I'm misunderstanding what "each thread has its own interpreter" means (and Dan confirmed it in pretty clear terms when I asked), that's simply not the case. Dan's terse followup is at: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/perl.perl6.internals/msg/e1885fc6da8aa068?dmode=source&hl=en -- Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith "It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback