Re: threads in general
[email protected] (Tim Bunce) Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:41:37 +0000
| Newsgroups | perl.perl5.porters,perl.perl6.porters |
|---|---|
| Organization | Paul Ingram Group, Software Systems, +44 1 483 862800 |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 09:27:25PM +0000, Alan Burlison wrote: > Ed Peschko wrote: > > > I'm sort of curious about the discussion (threads on solaris) - Chip has > > publicly stated (I believe) that threads will *not* be supported in topaz. > > Someone correct me if this statement is wrong, but doesn't this mean that > > any work on threading will just make the upgrade path from perl5 to perl6 more > > difficult? > > Personally I'm far from convinced of the utility/stability/practicality > of threads in perl5. IMHO its virtually impossible to retrofit threads > to existing software without either crippling performance or leaving > gaping holes in the system. I voted strongly against them in the first > place, but I was overruled the majority decision - which is fair enough. Ditto. > The only chance we have of getting a robust and scalable threaded perl > is if they are put in from the ground floor up, i.e. in Topaz, which if > you are correct isn't going to happen anyway. I think Chip, quite sanely, favors the thread-per-interpreter model. And I think that's what perl5 will end up with. Tim.