Karl, I share your point of view
I think it all boils down to using to much coarse language and
lack of politeness. This is why this discussion can trigger bad
emotions and alienate (not all but) some people instead of
getting questions answered in a more civilized manner.
This may sound
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:08 PM, rektide rekt...@voodoowarez.com wrote:
Your original request for threads-in-node has been met with
explanations from me, Ben, and Paddybyers about what would need to be
done to make that happen, and what the challenges are.
You are projecting defensively: I
Paddy Byers gave great insights on the difficuties involved in the
isolates feature. But there is not a single way to approach
multi-threading in node. I'd like to dive a bit into this because I feel
that there may have been a bit of a confusion.
What the isolates feature tried to do is put a
On Sep 19, 2012, at September 19, 20123:21 PM, rektide
rekt...@voodoowarez.com wrote:
I humbly propose not participating in things which annoy you or you find
overly distracting.
Mikeal was complaining about nothing except people discussing things, about
feeling hurt for others
On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 6:30:07 PM UTC-4, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
On Sep 19, 2012, at September 19, 20123:21 PM, rektide
rek...@voodoowarez.com javascript: wrote:
I humbly propose not participating in things which annoy you or you
find overly distracting.
Mikeal was
This whole thread business [pun intended] is about the deadest horse
ever to have lived...
I will say this, out of all the mailing lists I am on... This is the
only one that gets these huge conversations where the majority of the
content is pointless to actually improving the community... (and
This issue is done.
No, Isaac. I feel pissed on here. Ack that.
Ack'ed.
Your original request for threads-in-node has been met with
explanations from me, Ben, and Paddybyers about what would need to be
done to make that happen, and what the challenges are. There's
nothing else to discuss
I gently suggest that if we'd found and settled on some technical topics,
rather than meta-moderation, there would be six or seven posts here. If you
feel topics not to your interest, I revert to my former stance which is:
don't read them.
This is a mailing list: 8/10 topics have no interest
On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:55:00 PM UTC-4, Isaac Schlueter wrote:
No, Isaac. I feel pissed on here. Ack that.
Ack'ed.
Your original request for threads-in-node has been met with
explanations from me, Ben, and Paddybyers about what would need to be
done to make that happen,
On 18/09/2012, at 00:14, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
Jorge,
This is me asking you nicely to stop. You've succeeded in making some of the
most level headed and accommodating people in the community scream. Great
work, job well done. Time to stop now.
If you do not stop I'lll consider your
and is a huge annoyance and distraction for everyone who would like to
move forward
I humbly propose not participating in things which annoy you or you find
overly distracting.
Everyone who feels capable of engaging in progressive dialectic engagement
on technical topics and knows how to
Isaac: I fully confess to being an ignorant childish distracting useless
retrogressive drag on the community, and I'm sorry if this discussion in
fact hurts us. Also, seek trained medical professional help.
Alas, the hunger to know more about this topic STILL calls at me. It did
before
Multi-threading, even without zero copy, would allow for faster context
switching as well. Context switching is bad, process-per-thread is good and
helps avoids context switching, but there is a gain even if there is not an
easy zero copy benefit to be had.
*facepalm*
Rektide,
I told you exactly what has to happen if you're interested in pursuing this:
If you think that such a thing absolutely MUST be provided by the core
library, then that belongs in a github issue. Be prepared to make a
VERY strong case for it. It's a huge change to the architecture,
Rektide,
I still am very much interested in technical discussion around this
feature, know it abstractly but not deeply, and the cause of it being
shelved remains shrouded in mystery.
I made an independent effort to implement isolates - in the sense of
multiple node instances in a process,
That's a great post Paddy, lots of the gore on the issue although I maybe
don't totally agree on points 1 3. Most of process is trivial to
virtualise, it's just an effort thing but you are right to point out the
concern. But then maybe I am missing the point that your concern is over
native
I've got some idea what Nuno is groaning about. :) Threads-a-go-go is a
pretty daft silly thing.
It's certainly not the safe sane shared-nothing threading that keeps Node
JS safe. That
responsible multi-threading work was attempted in the 'isolates' branch of
Node.js. I would
Do you guys wonder why there is a collective groan when you show up?
Especially considering how difficult it is for a group of geographically
remote people to convey a collective groan in a written medium ;)
Threads-a-go-go lives exactly where it should; in userland where anyone who
wants to
So it is perfectly fine if someone writes:
Threads-a-go-go is a pretty daft silly thing.
It's certainly not the safe sane shared-nothing threading that keeps Node
JS safe. That
responsible multi-threading work was attempted in the 'isolates' branch of
Node.js
Jorge should just swallow the
So it is perfectly fine if someone writes:
Threads-a-go-go is a pretty daft silly thing.
It's certainly not the safe sane shared-nothing threading that keeps Node
JS safe. That
responsible multi-threading work was attempted in the 'isolates' branch of
Node.js
Jorge should just swallow
On 17/09/2012, at 12:04, Marco Rogers wrote:
Do you guys wonder why there is a collective groan when you show up?
Especially considering how difficult it is for a group of geographically
remote people to convey a collective groan in a written medium ;)
I only hear the usual waa waa of the
Everybody,
These debates give me hives. Seriously, they make my skin crawl.
If you think that providing an API for threads is a great idea, then
just go do it, as a userland module. Jorge did. What's the big deal?
Some people like it, some people don't. That's how anarchy works.
Think his
Jorge,
This is me asking you nicely to stop. You've succeeded in making some of the
most level headed and accommodating people in the community scream. Great work,
job well done. Time to stop now.
If you do not stop I'lll consider your behavior outright trolling and ask that
you be removed
Hi Isaac
Le mardi 18 septembre 2012 00:09:32 UTC+2, Isaac Schlueter a écrit :
These debates give me hives. Seriously, they make my skin crawl.
...
You know who almost never gets involved in these shenanigans? TJ
Holowaychuk, James Halliday, Matt Ranney, and the folks at Joyent and
I admit to willingly participating in this because I was off today and had
nothing better to do. :)
I don't think Jorge or anyone else has been much out of line in this
thread. And it's really only ever a handful of people that perpetuate these
debates until they devolve. Myself included. I think
This is where we disagree. I think that this is the worst thing we could be
doing and that it's actually damaging to the project.
In order for Node to be successful it needs to evolve past each challenge it
faces.
In the early days, everything was up for debate, and Node attracted a lot of
As someone who started using Node after said experimentation was over, I
want to publically thank those who argued this sort of thing *in the past*,
and am excited about what we (myself included) can build in and with Node.
Those decisions were not easy, but they've been decided, and by incredibly
I would very much like to get away from the idea that anyone should make
passionate speeches about how the world will end if we keep having
debates on the mailing list.
It's just not true Mikeal. You and Isaac both are over-reacting to this
issue. It's when I stopped over-reacting a while ago
Google is too smart for me. I wrote this reply as a new thread, and Google
has attached it to the old one. Apologies, but I am about to repost it
sans-excerpts.
-r
--
Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
Posting guidelines:
https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
There are long discussions in the Node community about what happened when
we did try to use Isolates. The lack of thread level protections from
things like mucking with process.* and the fact that native modules need to
add complex support for Isolates to be first class (many C level libraries
Thanks so much for the informative reply: that's a lot of things I don't
know about!
On Sunday, September 16, 2012 6:22:50 PM UTC-4, Bradley Meck wrote:
There are long discussions in the Node community about what happened when
we did try to use Isolates. The lack of thread level protections
Just thought I would add from experience of building a threaded version of
node. The process.* problem does not really exist if you create a new v8
context for each thread, there are some issues, particularly with
process.exit() behaviour but nothing too nasty.
Modules are a 50:50 issue I
Your link is being weird for some reason. Here's a better
url. https://github.com/hut78/troop.js
On Sunday, September 16, 2012 4:54:24 PM UTC-7, Kevin Jones wrote:
Just thought I would add from experience of building a threaded version of
node. The process.* problem does not really exist if
Depends on what you consider to be problematic with process.* ,
process.cwd() in particular bit me while trying a couple things, but could
be worked around, a slightly more annoying error dealt with cluster using
env variables, once again possible to work around.
As stated, I really like the
34 matches
Mail list logo
