On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 20:46 +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> At Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:32:26 -0400,
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 12:10 +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> > > What you are suggesting is essentially using a user-level thread
> > > package. (Compacting a thread's
At Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:32:26 -0400,
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 12:10 +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> > What you are suggesting is essentially using a user-level thread
> > package. (Compacting a thread's state in the form of a closure is a
> > nice optimization, but the mo
On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 12:10 +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> What you are suggesting is essentially using a user-level thread
> package. (Compacting a thread's state in the form of a closure is a
> nice optimization, but the model essentially remains the same.) The
> main advantage to user-level
Hi,
At Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:10:17 +0100,
Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> What you are suggesting is essentially using a user-level thread
> package. (Compacting a thread's state in the form of a closure is a
> nice optimization, but the model essentially remains the same.) The
> main advantage to user-
