On 10/22/06, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/22/06, Audrey Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just implemented it that way, and benchmarking shows little or no
> parallelism gain is made by it,
> compared to the [MVar] approach suggested by Sebastian Sylvan
> ( http://pugs.blogs.com/pugs/
On 10/22/06, Audrey Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just implemented it that way, and benchmarking shows little or no
parallelism gain is made by it,
compared to the [MVar] approach suggested by Sebastian Sylvan
( http://pugs.blogs.com/pugs/2006/10/more_smp_parall.html )...
I wonder why? The
在 Oct 21, 2006 5:14 PM 時，Taral 寫到：
On 10/21/06, Audrey Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> let proc n x = do
Hmm, am I missing something here, but how does forkIO (and data
parallelism) fit in into that scheme?
I R DUM.
let proc n x = forkIO $ do
I just implemented it that way, and benchma
