Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

Re^10: Why Coro?

by binary (Novice)
on Oct 27, 2010 at 23:09 UTC ( #867862=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^9: Why Coro?
in thread Why Coro?

Each iThread, is simply another instance of the Perl interpreter running in it's own kernel thread within that same process.

It is therefore not a "a separate process" in any way shape or form.

As has been explained to you *countless* times windows threads are used to emulate processes and those emulated processes are then used to emulate threads.

I don't know why I'm replying really because for some reason you're incapable of understanding this. Just because the perl interpreter is threaded doesn't mean userland perl has those same threads. This is a CLEAR distinction anyone with even the most basic of understanding can see. The threads you are referring to are windows threads created by C. That is not perl ithreads.

You're also disagreeing with Marc Lehmann who wrote Coro. What exactly have you written again? In fairness I think you just can't admit you're wrong. I certainly hope so for your sake as if you genuinely believe the things you're saying I fear for your intelligence and reading comprehension.

That's now 3 people who disagree with you including the author of Coro yet you still maintain your silliness. Everywhere I look I see you arguing with people. You really must enjoy it a lot. How sad.

Oh and please continue to show your maturity by negative rep'ing every reply I make here. What are you, 12 for goodness sake?


Comment on Re^10: Why Coro?
Re^11: Why Coro?
by ikegami (Pope) on Oct 27, 2010 at 23:50 UTC

    As has been explained to you *countless* times windows threads are used to emulate processes and those emulated processes are then used to emulate threads.

    Perl threads (which has nothing to do with Windows) don't emulate threads. They may or may not be threads by your definition, but they definitely don't emulate threads.

    If they don't have the properties of (your definition of) threads, then they don't emulate threads.

    If they have the properties of (your definition of) threads, then they are threads, and thus can't emulate threads.

      Perl threads (which has nothing to do with Windows) don't emulate threads. They may or may not be threads by your definition, but they definitely don't emulate threads. I'm referring to the windows threads which are used to implement the process model in Perl which is in turn used to implement ithreads.

      I'm finished with this nonsense. Back to making money. Too much time wasted trying to educate idiots.

        I'm referring to the windows threads which are used to implement the process model in Perl which is in turn used to implement ithreads.

        And you're saying the Windows threads emulate threads or the ithreads emulate threads? Either way, the answer doesn't change. No threads are being emulated.

Re^11: Why Coro?
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 28, 2010 at 00:04 UTC
    Ad-hominem attacks are not appropriate on this forum.

    Since Perl is open source, all you have to do is point at the source code portions that back up your claims.

      Exactly. Please scroll up and you'll see me point this out to browseruk who initially got personal for absolutely no reason.
        I was talking to you binary. I have looked, and nowhere do you point at the source code portions that back up your claims. My understanding of win32 fork emulation and perl threads seems to agree with what BrowserUk is saying.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://867862]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (4)
As of 2014-07-26 12:24 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (176 votes), past polls