Browse thread
- Pawel Wojciechowski
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 1997-04-16 (17:02) |
From: | Pawel Wojciechowski <Pawel.Wojciechowski@c...> |
Subject: |
> You make it sound like the only point of threads is to take advantage of > parallelism when the program is running on a multiprocessor machine. > A lot of people use threads for reasons that have nothing to do with > (objective notions of) performance, for example in GUI programming. > -- > Frank Christoph Next Solution Co. Tel: 0424-98-1811 > christo@nextsolution.co.jp Fax: 0424-98-1500 Threads are very useful indeed! Even if they don't take advantage of multiprocessor shared memory architectures. I never questioned that. I'm sorry you misunderstood me. I just wanted to know why, e.g. the architecure of Caml byte-code interpreter couldn't be multi-threaded. I'd like to thank Francois Rouaix (and others) who made it clear. We should wait for a truly concurrent memory management (garbage collector) to (o)Caml. As I understood the implementation is under way. I think having such an implementation ready to play with it would be fine. In some applications, however, the "potential advantage" of threads (i.e. each thread executing on a separate processor), understood as *one* of many other advantages of threads, can be vital. A system which I'm implementing now is inherently concurrent. Ideally any scheduling decisions, as well as actions within the system, should be programmed in such a way that in a shared-memory multi-processor, parts of my system can run in true real-time parallel. A significant part of the project is implemented in (o)caml and just wondering whether I have to implement anything in C in order to improve QoS or stay with Caml for good. F.C.: > By your logic, there would seem to be no point in emulating concurrency > on a sequential machine at all. This is not my logic at all :) I know many examples where emulating concurrency on a sequenial machine proved to be very succesful. Perhaps one of the more spectacular examples would be an experimental language PICT implementing Robin Milner's concurrent Pi-calculus on a uniprocessor machine. Pawel ,--------------------------------------------------------------, | Pawel~ T Wojciechowski cambridge university | | hpage is www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~ptw20 computer lab | | phome +44.1223 (3)34602 | `--------------------------------------------------------------`