[#10209] Market for XML Web stuff — Matt Sergeant <matt@...>

I'm trying to get a handle on what the size of the market for AxKit would be

15 messages 2001/02/01

[#10238] RFC: RubyVM (long) — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>

Hi,

20 messages 2001/02/01
[#10364] Re: RFC: RubyVM (long) — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2001/02/05

[#10708] Suggestion for threading model — Stephen White <spwhite@...>

I've been playing around with multi-threading. I notice that there are

11 messages 2001/02/11

[#10853] Re: RubyChangeRequest #U002: new proper name for Hash#indexes, Array#indexes — "Mike Wilson" <wmwilson01@...>

10 messages 2001/02/14

[#11037] to_s and << — "Brent Rowland" <tarod@...>

list = [1, 2.3, 'four', false]

15 messages 2001/02/18

[#11094] Re: Summary: RCR #U002 - proper new name fo r indexes — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>

> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

12 messages 2001/02/19

[#11131] Re: Summary: RCR #U002 - proper new name fo r indexes — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneik@...>

Robert Feldt wrote:

10 messages 2001/02/19

[#11251] Programming Ruby is now online — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

36 messages 2001/02/21

[#11469] XML-RPC and KDE — schuerig@... (Michael Schuerig)

23 messages 2001/02/24
[#11490] Re: XML-RPC and KDE — schuerig@... (Michael Schuerig) 2001/02/24

Michael Neumann <neumann@s-direktnet.de> wrote:

[#11491] Negative Reviews for Ruby and Programming Ruby — Jim Freeze <jim@...> 2001/02/24

Hi all:

[#11633] RCR: shortcut for instance variable initialization — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

13 messages 2001/02/26

[#11652] RE: RCR: shortcut for instance variable initialization — Michael Davis <mdavis@...>

I like it!

14 messages 2001/02/27

[#11700] Starting Once Again — Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>

OK, I'm starting again with Ruby. I'm just assuming that I've

31 messages 2001/02/27
[#11712] RE: Starting Once Again — "Aaron Hinni" <aaron@...> 2001/02/27

> 2. So far I think running under TextPad will be better than running

[#11726] Re: Starting Once Again — Aleksi Niemel<zak@...> 2001/02/28

On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Aaron Hinni wrote:

[ruby-talk:10713] Re: Suggestion for threading model

From: kjana@... (YANAGAWA Kazuhisa)
Date: 2001-02-12 03:51:45 UTC
List: ruby-talk #10713
In message <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102120019340.878-100000@localhost.localdomain>
spwhite@chariot.net.au writes:

> I've been playing around with multi-threading. I notice that there are
> different models for each of the options. Some split and rejoin. Some
> run in parallel with spin locks. Some are co-operative.
> 
> None of them are really satisfactory. I want threading to be part of
> the language, to be assimilated by the Borg of Syntax. Regexp's were
> assimilated, so threading should be conquerable.
> 
> After much consideration, here's a proposed model for threading. First
> comes the concept, then comes the optimisations.

Probably you like to read some surveys on concurrent object oriented
programming languages for revising your proposal.  such as

  ftp://ftp.cee.hw.ac.uk/pub/funcprog/nrs.coop96.ps.Z

or

  ftp://ftp.icsi.Berkeley.edu/pub/techreports/1995/tr-95-050.ps.gz 

both are relatively old so more recent papers are possibly available.


Here my thoght: 1. in ruby, every object (a target thing) is an object
(an instance of Object), so your plan causes too many fine grain
threads that choke the interpreter which has no such fine grain
threading system.  2. Programming model will be heavily modified.
That may cause many bugs coming from missed assumption on implicit
parallelism.  3. Most important one: Is that model really so useful?


-- 
kjana@os.xaxon.ne.jp                              February 12, 2001
What is done can't be undone.

In This Thread