[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?
From: |
Thien-Thi Nguyen |
Subject: |
Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs? |
Date: |
06 Dec 2003 19:15:55 -0500 |
Kai Grossjohann <address@hidden> writes:
Apparently, the big-lock suggestion is better, but why?
because it is likely even new code will need to use old code, and if old
code is ignorant of the new conventions, you will have problems. if new
conventions can be followed in a ways harmonious w/ the old code, you
are ok, but that is not guaranteed. that is probably the impetus behind
the big-lock approach.
it is like implementing (or even simulating) a flip-flop (dig out your
introductory logic design book): order w/in the device matters although
it doesn't matter outside.
thi
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, (continued)
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Nic Ferrier, 2003/12/03
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Stefan Monnier, 2003/12/03
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Robert J. Chassell, 2003/12/03
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Richard Stallman, 2003/12/04
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Stefan Monnier, 2003/12/04
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2003/12/04
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Richard Stallman, 2003/12/04
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Ted Zlatanov, 2003/12/04
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Stefan Monnier, 2003/12/04
Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Kai Grossjohann, 2003/12/06
- Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?,
Thien-Thi Nguyen <=
Re: Are there plans for a multi-threaded Emacs?, Martin Stjernholm, 2003/12/07