On 8 March 2010 00:05, anonymous <aim0s...@lavabit.com> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 11:48:38PM +0100, Uriel wrote: >> No, there is a fairly clear consensus about the meaning of 'process', >> there is no such consensus regarding 'threads', so being explicit >> saying 'pthreads', or 'CSP threads' (as in 'libthread'), or >> 'goroutines' is the best. > > Difference between pthreads and libthread is the way threads communicate > (locks/mutexes vs channels) but 'thread' means the same. Both in pthreads > and in libthread threads are like processes that share the same address > space (everything except registers and stack).
Can we please stop this useless discussion. We all know Uriel's opinion about pthreads and many of us agree that the pthread API sucks. Most of us will agree that not using the term "thread" is good when CSP-like concurrency is implicated. This doesn't change the fact however, that the conventional meaning of "thread" is well understood and that there is no real controversy in programming (pthreads, windows threads, Java threads, etc are all the same concept) about it, apart from Uriel's favor for CSP. Thanks, Anselm
