[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] Coming to Scheme from Python.

From: Kon Lovett
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] Coming to Scheme from Python.
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:23:28 -0700

Hash: SHA1

On Sep 21, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Steve Freitas wrote:

On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 11:14 +0200, Joerg F. Wittenberger wrote:

And that's why something like Termite makes so much sense. When you
institute immutables, and copy by value on function arguments, it makes
it easy to scale with multiple cores since you've eliminated most
potential concurrency bugs. So you run one host per core, and dispatch
the work. Have you look at Termite's syntax? It makes such things very,
very easy.

Chicken doesn't have an immutable property for its' objects; and no timeline for adding. So enforcing a no-mutation programming model means either removing mutating procedures & forms from the environment, relying on the good will of the programmer, or performing a deep-copy of every sent object.

  Usually that's
a memory management issue (Felix should know) which doesn't go away by any amount of code in the language. Needed is a n:m mapping from user
level threads to system threads running the chicken VM (runtime).

If I'm understanding your suggested n:m mapping correctly, then Termite
makes it really simple to establish what you're asking for.

But Chicken doesn't. Running multiple "chicken VM" in the same OS process is not currently possible.

FWIW, neither does Termite, at least the Gambit-C based prototype. Like Chicken, Gambit-C has only one OS thread per OS process.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]