<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<node id="869967" title="Re^4: Is Using Threads Slower Than Not Using Threads?" created="2010-11-07 17:13:50" updated="2010-11-07 17:13:50">
<type id="11">
note</type>
<author id="299049">
ysth</author>
<data>
<field name="doctext">
&lt;p&gt;In our last disagreement you would not even so much as recognize my arguments about context, just completely ignoring anything I said.  And there you were taking one phrase out of its qualifying context.  Here I am making an objection to a complete thought that was part of your reply to the OP; yes, not one pertinent to your main point.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Why am I doing so?  Because you seem to have elected yourself defender of ithreads to the point where you attack even true and reasonable cautionary points about them with a variety of shenanigans designed more to conceal than expose truth.  The truth is that ithreads are a very different beast than people coming from other languages may expect.  They are slow to start and tend to cause memory bloat.  Anywhere there is support for copy-on-write fork, fork and some variety of IPC is almost always a better choice.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
If that's politics, so be it.  Don't bother responding, I'm not going to read it.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;!-- Node text goes above. Div tags should contain sig only --&gt;
&lt;div class="pmsig"&gt;&lt;div class="pmsig-299049"&gt;
&lt;small&gt;-- &lt;br /&gt;
A math joke: r = | |csc(&amp;theta;)|+|sec(&amp;theta;)|-||csc(&amp;theta;)|-|sec(&amp;theta;)|| |&lt;br /&gt;
[http://ysth.info/fortune/|Online Fortune Cookie Search]&lt;br /&gt;
[http://ysth.info/initech/|Office Space merchandise]
&lt;/small&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</field>
<field name="root_node">
868687</field>
<field name="parent_node">
869889</field>
</data>
</node>
