On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 12:03 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote: > On 3/16/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 10:44 +0100, Nicolas Weber wrote: > > > > > A multithreaded matcher might be useful to vim but do we have a > > > > need for > > > > fuzzy matching ? > > > > vim doesn't use threads at the moment, and Bram seems to be reluctant > > > to include threads for various reasons. > > > I too agree, threading might complicate everything ( and a rather > > difficult programing model )... > > Again, multithreading as in parallel, as in being able to be in > multiple states at once. Not pthreads or anything like that. Sorry > about confusion. But this may also indicate that more knowledge about > what you're actually about to undertake may be necessary before > setting out. No offense intended, but the area of formal languages > (that includes regular expressions, regular languages, pattern > matching, and finite automata) isn't exactly the easiest of topics in > computer science, and having a good understanding of this topic really > is necessary to work on things like that discussed in this thread; so > I'd recommend seeing to it that you have the theory nailed down before > writing code or anything like that.
Nicolai, Yes i do understand your point. I understood what you said about being in several states at once, but i was referring to nicolas's comments. Nevertheless, I must accept that i'm still a newbie to this subject area. Anyway, that's the challenge i want to take, i've been into OOP and java for sometime but now my interests are in compiler theory and operating systems ( I think they are more challenging ). As you said, I have to cover a lot of grounds. My intention was to gather information on the depth of the subject and determine whether it's doable before applying to it. I will try my best to gain a foothold on the subject before 24th march ( final date for applications ). BTW, your comments are very much appreciated, no offense taken. :) - Asiri > nikolai
