From: Shashank Date <sdate@...>
Date: 2003-06-12T22:21:47+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby advantages over Perl


"Mauricio Fern�ndez" <batsman.geo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> I guess you meant that Ruby has *no* native threads but rather green
> threads, etc...

I must be using wrong terminology here ... I meant to say OS independant.
I thought "native" meant language supported ... but looks like it means OS
supported. Thanks for correcting me. What is the correct term for language
supported threading ? "Simulated threading" ? Is "green threads" a technical
term?

> But I'm not sure this would be perceived as an advantage: some people
> don't care about threads working in DOS or portability.

I can understand why people don't care for threading on DOS. But portability
?
Isn't that an advantage ? Unless, of course, you mean portability compared
to
lack of "native" threading.