J J-6 wrote:
> 
> That is, the best would be if some change could be made 
> and squeak was suddenly capable of running in multiple threads with the 
> current code base.
> 

I agree and that is why I found the active object + asynchronous messages
model interesting. From what I can tell (so far) there appears to be even
less impact. In a transactional system you would need some sort of
transactional construct like BlockClosure>>atomicValue:anObject which seems
unpleasant to me. Furthremore, I imagine the cost of having implicit
transactions for every instance variable would be significantly high. 
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Squeak-and-native-threads-tf2930209.html#a8241472
Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.