[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] support for accessing CPU/core count (processor-count)

From: Campbell Barton
Subject: Re: [PATCH] support for accessing CPU/core count (processor-count)
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 09:58:05 +1100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0

On 10/11/21 06:50, Arthur Miller wrote:
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

We seem to be talking past each other. I don't see why would want this as a C

There are typically 2 reasons to use C:
- For speed
- To use someone else's code which is easily available from C but not
   from ELisp.

Of course, but I don't see any of those apply to this case :).

The Elisp version of this function posted was incomplete by comparison in that it didn't support OpenBSD's ncpuonline feature or HPUX.

Also, this is not simply a call to an external process (executable-find "nproc") has some additional overhead.

I don't see this so much a case of ELisp vs C, more a case of OS-level API's being more appropriate than searching around for commands and parsing their output.

As I see nproc from core-utils is already doing suggested, and more than so, so
it is just to call it :).


PS: it is not directly "a couple of lines" either as someone suggested :).

Right, it's quite involved, as mentioned in a previous reply, this seems more appropriate for detecting OS-level threads (not spawning new processes).

reply via email to

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