[M3devel] crummy ThreadWin32.m3 implementation?

[Tony Hosking]

Might not be such a bad thing ;-)

On 21 Apr 2009, at 14:14, Jay wrote:

> Only if you drop support for pre-Vista versions.
>
>  - Jay
>
>
>
> > From: hosking at cs.purdue.edu
> > To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
> > Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:53:57 +1000
> > CC: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> > Subject: Re: [M3devel] crummy ThreadWin32.m3 implementation?
> >
> > Also, note that win32 now supports CVs directly! No need for
> > semaphores.
> >
> > On 20 Apr 2009, at 19:11, Jay wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Searching the web...finds this which seems very relevant:
> > >
> > > http://birrell.org/andrew/papers/ImplementingCVs.pdf
> > >
> > > - Jay
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------
> > >> From: jay.krell at cornell.edu
> > >> To: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> > >> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 08:47:21 +0000
> > >> Subject: [M3devel] crummy ThreadWin32.m3 implementation?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Um, ThreadWin32.m3 looks pretty crummy -- all LockMutex calls
> > >> bottleneck on one giant lock. .v0 and .v1 aren't bad this way.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> - Jay
> >
> >

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20090421/9cd6b33f/attachment-0002.html>