"John Macdonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > I would like to suggest a radically different > mechanism, that there be operators: fork, tfork, and > cfork to split off a process, thread, or coroutine > respectively. (The first might be called pfork > if we're willing to give up history for forward > consistancy.)
Nice, but insufficiently general. I have written systems which use multiple different thread schedulers (e.g. pthreads for preemptive; qThreads for non-preemptive) in addition the process forking. Perhaps we just need a single fork method, implemented polymorphically for different schedulers (or scheduler interfaces). One scheduler could be written in terms of others: so a thread-group could be a scheduler that keeps track of IDs, but delegates the real work to another scheduler. (I think I could describe a coroutine as an idiom whereby user-code becomes a thread-scheduler). The problem I see with the general approach is that it might not make the common cases sufficiently trivial. Dave.
