[squeak-dev] Re: The "correct" approach to multi-core systems.
siguctua at gmail.com
Sun Mar 2 21:42:26 UTC 2008
On 02/03/2008, nicolas cellier <ncellier at ifrance.com> wrote:
> Igor Stasenko a écrit :
> > On 02/03/2008, Jason Johnson <jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> But the question is, where do you make your trade offs. If you take
> >> the simple way *for you* then just give access to threading to
> >> everyone and let them suffer with the pain of a paradigm too complex
> >> to be done correctly.
> >> If you take the way that's simply for *everyone else* then you put
> >> this sharing inside the VM in the places it makes since and hide it
> >> from the language level (e.g. how at least Erlang does it)
> > I'd vote for *everyone* - put threading control at language side, as
> > everything else in smalltalk. Any 'magic' should be a code which i can
> > read and change, placed in image, not in VM.
> > No-magic is the spirit of smalltalk, after all.
> Yes but the spirit is also to build a VM able to hide some low level
> details like memory allocation...
> Smalltalk programmers are released from these release problems...
> Free to concentrate on higher level problems.
> Wouldn't this apply to threads too?
It is, but developers should be free in choice whether use locking
semantics or use vats/islands/E.
Simply because there is no single, ultimately best solution for all
kinds of parallel computing.
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
More information about the Squeak-dev