[REBOL] Re: Multithreading with Rebol
From: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 17-Oct-2003 16:01
Maarten Koopmans wrote:
>>The problem I see w/ coop multi-tasking (and I've implemented two coop
>>mt server frameworks in REBOL) is that it's a viral, an all-or-nothing
>>approach. If I have e.g. disk IO, I've to impl a simple file IO in a
>>coop way, i.e. decompositing it into a state machine w/ small tasks
>>that preferrably don't block. If I've some computing intensive
>>algorithm, once more, I've to state it in a coop way. And I (my very
>>personal opinion based on my experiences with that kind of stuff in
>>REBOL) find that decomposition rather boring and the result quite hard
>>to maintain. Imho, first class continuations would help in this
>>situation, but that's another topic.
>So let's do first-class continuations on the mezzanine level,
>re-implementing reduce as block interpreter that recursively evaluates
>the values supplied. And then redo 'do ;-) , retrofit load etc. Anybody
>interested? And when we have done that, why not make'em first class
>distributed in our full reflexive meta-language? Now that's GRID
>computing on steroids!
how fast can it be? Well, anyway - I am not expert on such things, but -
if your aproach will prove, why not take them down to native level? And
if we follow such thinking, why Rebol 2.0 family took step away from 1.0
model, which supported continuations? I e.g. remember Holger stating
that if Rebol would not be done the way it is, something like View would
not be easily possible (or would be slow?) ...
... just curious, as R# plans on such thing as continuations IIRC ...