[#144] Another implementation of Bignum — "Dmitry Antipov" <dmitry.antipov@...>
Hello Ruby hackers,
15 messages
2002/06/06
[#151] Re: Another implementation of Bignum [tarball attached]
— "Dmitry Antipov" <dmitry.antipov@...>
2002/06/07
Hello again,
[#152] Re: Another implementation of Bignum [tarball attached]
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2002/06/07
Hi,
[#174] Improving Ruby's garbage collector for interactive apps — Matthew Bloch <mattbee@...>
re: this problem I had a few weeks back:
8 messages
2002/06/19
[#177] Re: Improving Ruby's garbage collector for interactive apps
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2002/06/20
Hi,
[#178] Re: Improving Ruby's garbage collector for interactive apps
— Matthew Bloch <mattbee@...>
2002/06/21
On Thursday 20 June 2002 18:54, you wrote:
[#186] Steps to get multiple interpreters per process... — Sean Chittenden <sean@...>
Can someone chart out what would need to happen to get multiple ruby
10 messages
2002/06/24
[#187] Re: Steps to get multiple interpreters per process...
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2002/06/25
Hi,
[#188] Re: Steps to get multiple interpreters per process...
— Sean Chittenden <sean@...>
2002/06/25
> |Can someone chart out what would need to happen to get multiple
[#191] Re: Steps to get multiple interpreters per process...
— Chris Ross <chris@...>
2002/06/25
Re: Steps to get multiple interpreters per process...
From:
Sean Chittenden <sean@...>
Date:
2002-06-25 01:50:45 UTC
List:
ruby-core #188
> |Can someone chart out what would need to happen to get multiple > |ruby interpreters per process that way myself and others can do the > |leg work? -sc > > We have to list all global variables and pack everything into a > interpreter struct (like Perl guys did once). YACC parser still > uses globals, but it must be another story. Makes sense. What I don't fully understand (I've been staring at this screen for too long and am about to go for a run, so bare with me) is: *) Once the globals are contained in a struct, where will they live? In a global list that gets locked every time a new interpreter instance gets added to the process? *) How will functions that need to make use of this structure identify which stuct in the list is theirs to play with? As an after thought, once the globals are all contained, someone with Win32 knowledge could easily implement a win32 fork call that uses CreateProcess() and then pass only the data structure to the new process. I'm going off of what I've skimmed from the PostgreSQL guys, but that'd put another nail in the cygwin coffin. -sc -- Sean Chittenden