[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Concurrency, again
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Concurrency, again |
Date: |
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 18:03:15 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> > It would not be necessary to allow two ordinary Lisp programs to run
> > in parallel. In other words, it would be ok if Emacs allowed only one
> > ordinary program at any time -- alongside any number of special
> > asynchronous programs.
> That's what the code on the "concurrency" branch of the Emacs
> repository does -- except that (1) it doesn't allow you to create
> special asynchronous programs at all, and (2) it is capable of
> switching to another ordinary Lisp program when the current one is
> waiting for something (e.g., keyboard input or subprocess output), or
> explicitly yields to another.
(2) is a source of possible conflicts between various programs; I
suspect that lots of bugs could result. Are such bugs why the
"concurrency" branch is not ready?
To limit concurrency to specially designated programs
might make it easier to avoid those problems. Those programs
could conceivably be written following certain special rules
that avoid the bugs.
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.
- Re: Concurrency, again, (continued)
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/12
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, Stefan Monnier, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/15
- Re: Concurrency, again,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/15
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/16
- Re: Concurrency, again, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/16
- Re: Concurrency, again, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/10/17
- Re: Concurrency, again, Philipp Stephani, 2016/10/25
- Re: Concurrency, again, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/10/25
- Re: Concurrency, again, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, John Wiegley, 2016/10/13
- Re: Concurrency, again, Ted Zlatanov, 2016/10/14
- Re: Concurrency, again, Michael Albinus, 2016/10/14