Re: [9fans] Channels and threads

[erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>]

> Well, yeah, I get that. I think the question I need to
> ask is "why use Channels at all?"
> 
> What is the benefit of using Channels when threads can't
> be bound to a specific CPU in a multi-core system? Aren't
> Channels just a wrapper for locking a mutex and setting
> a variable or adding to a queue?

procs, not threads, can be "wired" to specific
processors.  so if your interest is to wire tasks (for lack of a
better term) to processors, you can do that with procs.

on modern pc hardware, the gulf between memory and
the processor is large enough, that i'm not sure that you'd
want to wire procs to processors.  wiring data to processors
would make more sense.

- erik