Futures are the parallel construct that James Swaine is working on. Likely it won't be a good fit for this, but James is going to run some tests to be sure.
Robby On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Jon Rafkind <rafk...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: > Eli Barzilay wrote: >> >> On Nov 9, Matthew Flatt wrote: >> >>> >>> Low-priority callbacks, meanwhile, effectively have a higher >>> priority than threads blocked on `system-idle-evt'. So, maybe it's >>> good that syntax coloring uses callbacks, since that will give it a >>> higher priority than loading cross-reference information. >>> >> >> That's what I was fantasizing on previously -- in terms of that >> message, low priority callbacks and idle events make two levels. (And >> yes, the idle event as an "I really don't care when it runs, just move >> it out of the way" is something that fits the xref loading well, but >> not the colorer.) >> >> BTW, one thing that I don't like about my code is that it first >> sleeps, then waits for an idle event. My first thought was that it >> should wait for the system to be idle for some time before it kicks >> in. It's not possible to do this now, right? (Modulo some ridiculous >> busy-wait loop that keeps polling the event.) Is it possible to add >> something that will make it possible? >> >> > > I noticed there was some new `futures' code in src/mzscheme/future.c. Aren't > futures exactly whats required here? >> >> (In theory there's not much point in doing this if the time slices >> that I'm using are smaller than what matters for human interaction, >> but when resources like IO are involved, it might make things feel a >> little less responsive.) >> >> > > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev