From: Peter Zotov <whitequark@...>
Date: 2012-08-29T07:30:34+09:00
Subject: Re: force child threads run paralelly?

Tony Arcieri писал 29.08.2012 00:07:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Peter Zotov 
> <whitequark@whitequark.org>wrote:
>
>> Ruby 1.8 had green threads, which did work on threadless platforms, 
>> but
>> having green
>> threads doesn't require one to abandon multicore support. For 
>> example,
>> Erlang
>> has both.
>
>
> A minor nit: depending on who you ask, the phrase "green threads" is 
> the
> proper opposite of "native threads". Systems that utilize native 
> threads
> for scheduling (e.g. the Erlang SMP scheduler) are probably not 
> properly
> described as "green threaded". Prior to the SMP scheduler, Erlang 
> could be
> described as green threaded.
>
> Erlang's creators prefer the phrase "process" for its concurrency
> primitive, although it can generally be described as being 
> "microthreaded"

I think that the term "userspace threads" works for any protected-mode 
OS.
E.g DOS does not have explicitly defined userspace, but a scheduling
pthreads shim for DOS is effectively a green thread implementation, so 
the
distinction is a bit meaningless there.

"Interpreter-defined threads" would also cover various RTOS'es running 
in
environments where there is an OS/user code distinction, but no
userspace/kernelspace one, through it still does not work for DOS.

-- 
   WBR, Peter Zotov.