On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:27:18PM +0100, nigelsande...@btconnect.com wrote: > On Fri, 14 May 2010 10:01:41 +0100, Ruud H.G. van Tol - rv...@isolution.nl > <+nntp+browseruk+014f2ed3f9.rvtol#isolution...@spamgourmet.com> wrote: > > > > > >The support of threading should be completely optional. The threading > >support should not be active by default. > > I'd like to understand why you say that? > > Two reasons I can think of: > > 1: Performance. The perception that adding support for threading will > impact the performance of non-threaded applications.
I think that perhaps he's thinking of overhead associated with spawning and managing threads - even just one...so, if only 1 thread bound to a single core is desired, then I think this is a reasonable and natural thing to want. Maybe the core binding on an SMP box would be the more challenging issue to tackle. Then, again, this is the role of the OS and libnuma (on Linux, anyway)... > > If you don't use threads, the presence of the ability to use them if you > need to will not affect you at all. > The presence of Unicode support will have a far more measurable affect > upon performance. And it will be unavoidable. > > 2: Complexity. The perception that the presence of threading support will > complicate non-threaded apps. > > Again, the presence of Unicode support adds far more complexity to the mix > that that for threading. > But with either, if you choose not to use it, you shouldn't even be aware > of its presence. > > Do you believe that Unicode support should be dropped? > > > > >See also http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-posix1.html > >and fathom why "Threads are fun" reads to me like how a drug dealer > >lures you to at least try it once. > > To me, that reads far more like some of the advocacy I've seen for Giving > Blood. > "If your squeamish, get a friend to distract you, or listen to some good > music whilst they put the needle in". > > > > >Rather fork-join! > > For platforms where fork is native, it doesn't go away just because > threads support is present. > > > > >(Do Perl_6 hyper-operators need pthreads?) > > > > Buk. -- B. Estrade <estr...@gmail.com>
