Tim Daneliuk wrote: > Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Is/Was it not the case, though, that some languages present > a threading model to the programmer that is realized in user > space, but not in the kernel. ISTR some early implementations > of Posix Threads that worked that way. The API was there > and was correct, but - since everything was actually running > in user space - when a single "thread" blocked, they all did.
People did things like that to hammer threading onto operating systems so dumb they couldn't context switch, like DOS, early Windows, and MacOS through 7. Nobody does that any more. For one thing, it's easier to build a real scheduler than to build the hacks for working without one. (Mac programmers referred to this as the Mess Inside - no real CPU dispatcher, but "deferred tasks", "timer tasks", "vertical interval tasks", and similar hacks to work around the lack of one.) John Nagle -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list