Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?

[Miles Bader]

David Masterson <address@hidden> writes:
> For instance, if the display-engine could be separated from the
> lisp-engine parts, then perhaps a mini-scheduler could fork off
> lisp-engines as needed (or requested) to process complicated things.
> The "engines" would theoretically be lighter weight than Emacs proper,
> but not as light-weight as multi-threading would allow.

How would this be different than multiple threads, as far as avoiding
typical threading problems (when lisp programs modify global/globally
reachable data)?

-Miles
-- 
Come now, if we were really planning to harm you, would we be waiting here, 
 beside the path, in the very darkest part of the forest?