From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id IAA06923; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 08:46:17 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA06523 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 08:46:15 +0200 (MET DST) From: briand@aracnet.com Received: from obsidian.spiritone.com (obsidian.spiritone.com [216.99.193.137]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3B6lBjq022849 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 08:47:12 +0200 Received: from soggy.deldotd.com (216-99-206-32.cust.aracnet.com [216.99.206.32]) by obsidian.spiritone.com (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i3B6kA59023510; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:46:10 -0700 Received: from briand by soggy.deldotd.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1BCYjJ-0000XO-00; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:46:09 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16504.59825.814348.947278@soggy.deldotd.com> Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:46:09 -0700 To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net Cc: Ville-Pertti Keinonen , caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] exene and ocaml ? In-Reply-To: <1080828521.13854.358.camel@pelican> References: <16491.38344.186267.44292@soggy.deldotd.com> <1080807590.13854.260.camel@pelican> <6C27A642-83BE-11D8-96B0-000393863F70@exomi.com> <1080828521.13854.358.camel@pelican> X-Mailer: VM 6.92 under Emacs 21.2.1 X-Miltered: at nez-perce by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 sourceforge:01 2004:99 threading:01 implemented:01 posix:01 threads:01 threads:01 posix:01 gc'ed:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 garbage:01 writes:01 wrote:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 239 >>>>> "skaller" == skaller writes: skaller> On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 19:24, Ville-Pertti Keinonen wrote: >> On Apr 1, 2004, at 11:19 AM, skaller wrote: >> Yes, my "reasonably well" was in the context of current >> expectations and tools. I'd really love for OCaml to have >> efficient threading (especially if they were implemented using >> continuations). >> >> I wouldn't use or recommend a massively multithreaded approach >> unless there was a practical and efficient enough environment >> available. skaller> Indeed it would be a disaster to use Posix threads for this skaller> .. Big delay... and then I was thinking about that statement... Is that really true ? If I only have maybe something like 5-10 threads running, why would it be such a problem ? I know almost nothing about the efficiency of posix threads. Of course the other idea, is that I just run the program in the virtual machine and use lightweight threads. >>From what I've seen so far, for what I am trying to do the VM may be good enough. What does worry me is your comment about garbage collection and threads. Are ocaml threads not properly GC'ed ? Brian ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners