|No such thing as a small change|
I'm sorry, but the implentation you describe was not released until 2002.
Really? Then how do you account for all the pthread references in this code from Perl 5005 released 1998:
And this from perl 5.6.0 released March 2000:
The only way in which you are right -- and its a stretch -- is that the first attempt at providing threading in Perl -- the one above; which also used OS kernel threading: pthreads on *nix and OS threads on Windows and OS/2 -- was "very experimental" and was immediately replace by the iThreads implementation.
Update: Caveat: assuming it is reliable enough. However, in regard to "clearly have nothing useful...please refrain" On second thoughts, someone with such arrogance is an unsafe contributor to the docs. To teach, one must first sincerely have sufficient character to learn.
I'm very capable of learning; just not from people who make shit up and pass it off as knowledge.
And if you want to challenge that conclusion and "educate me"; then simply post a link to the authoritative place where you learnt that: "So Perl boldly went and implemented (interpreter-based) threads (i.e. without OS support),"
What you take as "arrogance" is simply 'well founded and proven knowledge'. Ie. The knowledge to see through BS.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.I'm with torvalds on this Agile (and TDD) debunked I told'em LLVM was the way to go. But did they listen!