The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
From: rektide <rekt...@voodoowarez.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 16:11:48 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sun, Sep 16 2012 7:11 pm
Subject: Re: Threading, and Dogmatisms.
Thanks so much for the informative reply: that's a lot of things I don't On Sunday, September 16, 2012 6:22:50 PM UTC-4, Bradley Meck wrote: Caveat emptor, doesn't seem like a real issue, just a fact of life. > There are long discussions in the Node community about what happened when > and the fact that native modules need to add complex support for Isolates This in particular would be great to read about! This seems like the chief > to be first class (many C level libraries deal poorly with Isolates due to > them not being exactly like threads from what I understand) are fairly well > discussed. potential show-stopper, and most open ended problem. > In addition things like C's abort(), and any shared memory still cause I'm less willing to say caveat emptor here, sounds harrier, but again > problems with Isolates. "doing it and creating potential problems" (particularly if they're exit case problems) seems preferable to not doing it. > It would be interesting to delve into these problems, but for example if People who complain about threads generally do not have in depth knowledge > you use rust the runtime has explicit knowledge of threads rather than v8 > so you can reduce most of the problems with concurrency to message passing > and the same problems as process.* > of difficulties in doing so with Node's environment, but should feel free I have done some attempts at research on the topic: this has been > to look them up and discuss solutions rather than simply stating "it should > have threads". considerably more informative than any threads I've turned up. Perhaps I was doing my search wrong. That all said, apologies for not being able to bring a more balanced perspective to my "should have threads" stance, I would like to be able to do better. > personally really like what Threads a Go Go does, but it still faces the Thanks for contributing. > difficulties listed above difficulties when you start to delve deep into it. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||