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 PAA23051; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:20:33 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA23359 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:20:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from oxy.exomi.com (b212-54-21-162.elisa-laajakaista.fi [212.54.21.162]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3BDKUYM028928 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:20:31 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oxy.exomi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29D651A9285; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:21:25 +0300 (EEST) In-Reply-To: <16504.59825.814348.947278@soggy.deldotd.com> 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> <16504.59825.814348.947278@soggy.deldotd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <2168ACAE-8BBB-11D8-8571-000393863F70@exomi.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: skaller@users.sourceforge.net, caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen Subject: Re: [Caml-list] exene and ocaml ? Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:21:24 +0300 To: briand@aracnet.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613) X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 threads:01 threads:01 gc'ed:01 threading:01 posix:01 erlang:01 erlang:01 conceptual:01 abstraction:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 garbage:01 garbage:01 mainstream:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 254 In case this was referring to my comment in an earlier message in the thread... On Apr 11, 2004, at 9:46 AM, briand@aracnet.com wrote: > What does worry me is your comment about garbage collection and > threads. Are ocaml threads not properly GC'ed ? They aren't automatically collected in that they exist until they're destroyed or exit...but this is normal for mainstream, heavyweight threading systems. I count OCaml virtual machine threads as heavyweight, as well, even though they are lightweight to create, as they have scalability problems (O(n) scheduling - counting all threads, regardless of state). I mentioned garbage collection as an example of a specific issue that would arise in porting eXene to OCaml. OCaml/POSIX/Java etc. threads are, in a sense, a different kind of programming tool compared to Oz/CML threads or Erlang processes (note that Erlang processes are also not garbage collected when unreachable, which is even worse in Erlang than other languages, as they are often the only way of encapsulating state). The former kinds of threads are suitable for explicit parallelism (e.g. to take advantage of SMP), but poorly suited for concurrency as a conceptual programming abstraction (it'll work, but not scale well). ------------------- 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