At 01:53 PM 9/20/2001 -0700, Damien Neil wrote: >On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 04:38:57PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > Nope. Internal I/O, at least as the interpreter will see it is async. You > > can build sync from async, it's a big pain to build async from sync. > > Doesn't mean we actually get asynchrony, just that we can. > >For clarification: do you mean async I/O, or non-blocking I/O? Async. When the interpreter issues a read, for example, it won't assume the read completes immediately. Dan --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Uri Guttman
- RE: Parrot multithreading? Hong Zhang
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Rocco Caputo
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Michael L Maraist
- SV: Parrot multithreading? Arthur Bergman
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Michael L Maraist
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Rocco Caputo
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Parrot multithreading? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Damien Neil
- RE: Parrot multithreading? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Parrot multithreading? Hong Zhang
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Damien Neil
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Uri Guttman
- Re: SV: Parrot multithreading? Michael L Maraist
- Re: SV: Parrot multithreading? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Parrot multithreading? Uri Guttman
- RE: Parrot multithreading? Hong Zhang
- Re: SV: Parrot multithreading? Uri Guttman
- Re: SV: Parrot multithreading? Dan Sugalski