[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Concurrency, again
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Concurrency, again |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Oct 2016 17:01:24 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
I thought that "concurrency" and "parallelism" were the same.
I don't understand the distinction you are making.
I think the main use of parallelism in Emacs would be to make some
commands asynchronous. Currently, the only way a command can be
asynchronous is if it runs in a separate process. With some rather
unsophisticated parallelism, commands written in Lisp could
be made asynchronous.
The easy way to support this would be to provide special constructs
that can be used to make a particular program able to run
asynchronously. Such programs could run in parallel with any and all
ordinary Lisp programs.
It would not be necessary to allow two ordinary Lisp programs to run
in parallel. In other words, it would be ok if Emacs allowed only one
ordinary program at any time -- alongside any number of special
asynchronous programs.
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.
- Re: Concurrency, again, (continued)
- Re: Concurrency, again, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/12
- Re: Concurrency, again, Søren Pilgård, 2016/10/12
- Re: Concurrency, again, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/12
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/12
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/12
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/15
- Re: Concurrency, again, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/15
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/15
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/16
- Re: Concurrency, again, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/16
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/17
- Re: Concurrency, again, Philipp Stephani, 2016/10/25
- Re: Concurrency, again, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/10/25