Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:30:43 -0400, Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> declaimed > the following in comp.lang.python: >> with these issues. If I ever find myself having to have non-trivial >> threads again, I'll check the state of the threading models in other >> languages, and make a serious push for implementing parts of the >> program in a less popular language with a less primitive threading >> model. > The June edition of "SIGPLAN Notices" (the PLDI'05 proceeding issue) > has a paper titled "Threads Cannot Be Implemented As a Library" -- which > is primarily concerned with the problems of threading being done, well, > via an add-on library (as opposed to a native part of the language > specification: C#, Ada, Java).
Thanks for the reference. A litte googling turns up a copy published via HP at <URL: http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-209.html >. > I suspect Python falls into the "library" category. Well, that's what it's got now, so that seem likely. <mike -- Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list