On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 08:12:36 -0700, shenanigans-65eDfwRo+1xeoWH0uzbU5w wrote:
> Creators of Erlang have a Lisp background, and one feature of the Erlang > VM (BEAM) that I'd like back-ported into Common Lisp is their process. > > An Erlang "process" is cheap to create, cheap to destroy, cheap when > blocked, and upon exit performs bulk gc of its allocated memory; e.g., > munmap(). I have to voice interest. I would love for a CL implementation to support lightweight threads. > The open question here is to address a stated non-goal of CL-MUPROC, "we > rely on the CL implementation's MP system" and "considerably heavier > than Erlang processes". [See presentation link from > https://common-lisp.net/project/cl-muproc/ ] How did I miss cl-muproc? My spare time hacking in the lat months has been implementing the *exact same thing*. Oh well...
