Sorry I meant has *no *GIL.
Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2014 22:01:57 UTC+2 schrieb Tobias Knopp: > > No, julia has to GIL. It has segfault if you try to call functions from > different threads ;-) > > Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2014 21:55:08 UTC+2 schrieb Aerlinger: >> >> Julia in its present implementation uses a global-interpreter lock much >> like most other dynamic programming languages, correct? >> >> On Friday, June 20, 2014 10:51:17 AM UTC-4, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >>> >>> For concurrent I/O, green threads are far more scalable than using >>> kernel threads. For concurrent computation, green threads don't buy you >>> anything, but exposing kernel threads directly as in C++ or Java forces all >>> library authors to become experts on concurrency since they have to make >>> sure all of their code is thread-safe, at the very least. Either that or >>> everyone has to worry about which libraries than can or can't use in >>> concurrent code. It rapidly becomes a mess. Our current approach to >>> concurrent computation is a shared-nothing multi-process model that also >>> works across machines. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Tobias Knopp <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think the answer to this question is not tight to Julia. Both models >>>> have advantagous and they are actually not comparable 1 to 1. >>>> >>>> One simple reason why Julia currently has no threads is that libjulia >>>> is not thread safe. I am experimenting in changing this (see >>>> https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/6741) but it is far from clear >>>> if this will be feasible in the end. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Tobi >>>> >>>> Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2014 11:32:11 UTC+2 schrieb Bienlein: >>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to ask why Julia does not have a conventional thread model à >>>>> la Java, C++, etc. but is based on couroutines. Not that I would >>>>> criticise >>>>> this. I would just like to know in what way the use case of Julia >>>>> promotes >>>>> couroutines simply out of interest, because it is not obvious to me. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, Bienlein >>>>> >>>> >>>
