l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis: > Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> skribis: > >> I guess the one remaining concern I have is that if there are any >> long-running futures in the process, then any 'touch' could take a very >> long time to complete, even if the future it is waiting for is a very >> short job. >> >> For example, (par-map - '(1 2 3)) could take several minutes to complete >> if (par-map process-image list-of-images) is being done in another >> thread. > > Right. That’s actually easy to fix, but the advantage of the current > solution is that it uses less code. Anyway, you’re probably right, so > I’ll do that.
I didn’t do that (as discussed in this thread), and ended up merging wip-nested-futures as is. Thanks, Ludo’.
