[clean-list] Concurrent/parallel threads in CLEAN

[Marco Kesseler]

Hi John,

Just wondering: What is too slow to support a shared heap? Two times  
slower? Ten times?

It is valuable to be able to do some multithreading no matter what the  
processing speed becomes. Also from an academic point of view. It made  
sense more than a decade ago, why not now?

It all depends on the application that one wants to devise. So just  
make it an optional feature.

I am not against message passing, but it makes a lot of sense to have  
some parallelism along the lines of good old {P} and {I}. For no other  
reason than that explicit message passing is not what makes a  
functional language stand out.

I am sure that you could have a basic setup running within a month (I  
don't want to pressure you).

best regards,
Marco



On May 8, 2009, at 5:41 PM, John van Groningen wrote:

>
> Parnell Flynn wrote:
>
>> Are there any plans to add any of the features presented in Pascal
>> Serrarens's paper?  Any plans to bring the Concurrent back to  
>> Concurrent
>> CLEAN?
>
> We plan to make the generated code and runtime system thread safe.  
> This
> makes it possible to create threads with separate heaps and stacks.
>
> We would also like to have threads that share the heap. Unfortunately
> the synchronization primitives supported by current processors are so
> slow that these slow down the execution of programs too much.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> John van Groningen
> _______________________________________________
> clean-list mailing list
> clean-list at science.ru.nl
> http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/clean-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/clean-list/attachments/20090508/df4c09a9/attachment.html