Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:48:28 -0700 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: LinuxThreads replacement Message-ID: <20030715174828.GA37077@HAL9000.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <3F13D2CC.68D9DEC9@mindspring.com> References: <007601c3467b$5f20e960$020aa8c0@aims.private> <004d01c348ae$583084f0$812a40c1@PETEX31> <16146.65087.69689.594109@emerger.yogotech.com> <3F13B1B4.8765B8F3@mindspring.com> <20030715082910.GA34696@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3F13D2CC.68D9DEC9@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003, Terry Lambert wrote: > David Schultz wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2003, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > Yes, this is somewhat mitigated by the fact that it's easier to write > > > threads code than an FSA, such that a lesser coder is still able to > > > be productive. As a class, it's a tool I would lump in with things > > > like "perl". > > > > Actually, event-based programming is usually easier, since it does > > not require synchronization. A number of people, myself included, > > think that threads are overused, and often used incorrectly. But > > as Nate pointed out, threads are useful for many purposes, the > > most fundamental of which are SMP scalability and reduced latency. > > [graphics contexts in OpenGL] > [restartable system calls] > [thread contention scope in 1x1] > [interrupting close(2) with a signal] > [the Banker's Algorithm] > [races involving sockets] > [Mach activations] > [intention-mode locking] You have made some interesting points, but are you sure you're responding to the right thread? :-P Perhaps we need to adjust your contention scope...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030715174828.GA37077>