[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can we go GTK-only?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Can we go GTK-only? |
Date: |
Tue, 01 Nov 2016 15:14:22 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) |
> This is simply incorrect. On _some_ platforms, that is true. But not
> on all, not anywhere near that.
Give us a hint what hides behind this "not all". Clearly, I'm not alone
here who really has no idea what you're afraid of, here. Multi-threaded
programming is nasty, yes, but not nasty enough that you can't
use malloc.
BTW, w.r.t a GIL, AFAIK this discussion started mentioning threads
mostly as a way to *structure* the code to ease up interaction with libs
that want to have their own event loop (i.e. a matter of concurrency),
not as a way to improve performance. So the use of a GIL wouldn't be
particularly scary.
Stefan
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, (continued)
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/11/01
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/11/01
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/11/01
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/11/01
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/11/01
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/11/01
- Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?,
Stefan Monnier <=
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Perry E. Metzger, 2016/11/01
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/11/02
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, Daniel Colascione, 2016/11/02
Re: Can we go GTK-only?, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2016/11/02