At 6:09 PM +1100 11/19/02, Damian Conway wrote:
Whups, misunderstanding there. I realize that we need to throw an exception (or a junction of exception and not exception) if evaluating one of the junction members. The question is whether we should evaluate them all regardless and then figure it out at the end, and what to do with currently running junction evaluations if we've spawned off multiple threads to evaluate them in parallel. I expect I'm getting a bit too Quantum here, though.Dan Sugalski wrote:We're definitely going to need to nail the semantics down. Would one thread throwing an exception require all the threads being aborted, for example?
I would imagine so. You can't reasonably build a junction out of values that weren't successfully created.
I'm thinking that we shouldn't parallelize junction evaluation by default. Dealing with threads has too many issues that must be dealt with to spring it on unsuspecting programs.
As for short-circuiting: why not? Junctions are inherently unordered, so there's no guarantee which state of the junction is processed first (whether they're being processed in parallel or series).
That's fine. One of the semantics I want nailed down. :)
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
