Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] exene and ocaml ?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-04-11 (06:46)
From: briand@a...
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] exene and ocaml ?
>>>>> "skaller" == skaller  <> writes:

  skaller> On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 19:24, Ville-Pertti Keinonen wrote:
  >> On Apr 1, 2004, at 11:19 AM, skaller wrote:

  >> Yes, my "reasonably well" was in the context of current
  >> expectations and tools.  I'd really love for OCaml to have
  >> efficient threading (especially if they were implemented using
  >> continuations).
  >> I wouldn't use or recommend a massively multithreaded approach
  >> unless there was a practical and efficient enough environment
  >> available.

  skaller> Indeed it would be a disaster to use Posix threads for this
  skaller> ..

Big delay... and then 

I was thinking about that statement... Is that really true ?  If I
only have maybe something like 5-10 threads running, why would it be
such a problem ?

I know almost nothing about the efficiency of posix threads.

Of course the other idea, is that I just run the program in the
virtual machine and use lightweight threads.

>From what I've seen so far, for what I am trying to do the VM may be
good enough.

What does worry me is your comment about garbage collection and
threads.  Are ocaml threads not properly GC'ed ?


To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: