On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 09:11, Dan Sugalski wrote: > At 10:03 PM -0400 4/13/05, Michael Walter wrote:
> >On 4/13/05, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> All security is done on a per-interpreter basis. (really on a > >> per-thread basis, but since we're one-thread per interpreter it's > >> essentially the same thing) > >Just to get me back on track: Does this mean that when you spawn a > >thread, a separate interpreter runs in/manages that thread, or > >something else? > > We'd decided that each thread has its own interpreter. Parrot doesn't > get any lighter-weight than an interpreter, since trying to have > multiple threads of control share an interpreter seems to be a good > way to die a horrible death. So to follow up on Michael's question: does this mean that you spawn a new thread, instance an interpreter, and then begin executing shared code? What about data? I assume that all has to be shared, since shared data is a fundamental piece of any threaded application's assumptions. -- Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith "It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback
