From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] vfork and paging From: forsyth@vitanuova.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-agwwalabfzqqaortdcxpoczdon" Message-Id: <20011003094521.3E7BF19A3C@mail.cse.psu.edu> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 10:49:59 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: fb812d2e-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-agwwalabfzqqaortdcxpoczdon Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit writing correct programs is hard, but the addition of concurrency need not make it harder, and indeed if the problem includes concurrency (as with networks, file servers and interaction), having concurrency in the system and language can make it much easier to get it right, with structurally simpler solutions, compared to (say) the event driven schemes. of course, it depends on the approach taken to concurrency. there are several appealing models, but CSP's processes and channels model works well. Communicating Sequential Processes encourages the composition of sequential processes to solve concurrent problems. in its or Newsqueak/Alef/Limbo guises which all allow sending channels down channels, you can go a bit further. unfortunately, many `threads' designs tend by contrast to be stuck in the lock/sleep/wakeup model of the late 1960s. that java stuff is a nightmare. --upas-agwwalabfzqqaortdcxpoczdon Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu> Received: from punt-1.mail.demon.net by mailstore for forsyth@vitanuova.com id 1002094953:10:02668:1; Wed, 03 Oct 2001 07:42:33 GMT Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by punt-1.mail.demon.net id aa1002475; 3 Oct 2001 7:42 GMT Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.20.6]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id CA14119A57; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 03:42:05 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: from smtp.noos.fr (zola.noos.net [212.198.2.76]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 4823F19A3C for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 03:41:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 13687497 invoked by uid 0); 3 Oct 2001 07:41:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO SOMA) ([212.198.185.162]) (envelope-sender ) by 212.198.2.76 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; 3 Oct 2001 07:41:14 -0000 Message-ID: <058701c14bde$5b014f80$a2b9c6d4@SOMA> To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu> References: <20011002152706.3B01419A34@mail.cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] vfork and paging MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Archive: Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 09:38:08 +0200 > if i ever have to do multi-threaded code in C on another platform > again i shall port and use the plan 9 thread library - it's by far the > most reasonable i've seen. there's a thread lib for plan 9? i believe that threads were outlawed, because thread programming was considered to be too hard. which isn't a bad thing 'cos writing correct programs is hard enough and the closest you used to get to threads was kernel hacking and that code/compile/run cycle is damn painful. at least threads are in user mode so your m/c doesn't crash and your f/s doesn't get trashed. --upas-agwwalabfzqqaortdcxpoczdon--