[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Concurrency, again

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Concurrency, again
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 22:26:45 +0300

> From: John Wiegley <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:01:35 -0700
> https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/56q8ih/john_wiegley_id_much_rather_we_reexamine_the/
> It's interesting to note how many people agree with caution, or don't claim to
> need threading, vs. those calling for its inclusion.

Most of that thread is irrelevant, because most, if not all the
participants obviously have no idea what the concurrency branch tries
to do, what are its scope and limits, and what will be its impact on

People who want to make up their own mind are encouraged to do

  git diff ...origin/concurrency

and read the diffs.  They are not large, which already should speak
volumes about the potential impact.  They also include very nice
documentation, so C-challenged readers don't need to wade through C
code to get the feeling of what it is about.  There are also ERT tests
that could serve as simple examples of Lisp usage.

For those who do decide to read the diffs, I have a small quiz of 2
questions, which are supposed to summarize what you have learned:

  1) What will be different behavior-wise in a concurrency-enabled
     Emacs that runs Lisp code which never creates any additional

  2) If a Lisp application does create other threads, where in the
     code you reviewed will thread switch happen, and by what

Enjoy your reading.

reply via email to

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