[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: the state of the concurrency branch
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: the state of the concurrency branch |
Date: |
Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:26:01 +0300 |
> Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 11:05:01 -0700
> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> CC: Tom Tromey <address@hidden>, address@hidden,
> address@hidden, address@hidden
>
> we should redo the code so that there's not a separate sys_* level
> above a pthread_ level, as the extra level's complexity isn't buying
> us anything.
I presume the modified code will still leave a place for a
non-pthreads implementation, right?
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, (continued)
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Stefan Monnier, 2013/08/26
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Tom Tromey, 2013/08/26
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Paul Eggert, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Tom Tromey, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Paul Eggert, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Tom Tromey, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Paul Eggert, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Paul Eggert, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Tom Tromey, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Tom Tromey, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Stefan Monnier, 2013/08/27
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/08/28
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Tom Tromey, 2013/08/28
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2013/08/28
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Stefan Monnier, 2013/08/28
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Tom Tromey, 2013/08/28
- Re: the state of the concurrency branch, Stefan Monnier, 2013/08/28