Ross Ridge wrote:
>Hmm? I don't see how the "Lua-style" coroutines you're looking are any
>lightweight than what Maurizio Vitale is looking for. They're actually
>more heavyweight because you need to implement some method of returning
>values to the "coroutine" being yeilded to.
Dustin Laurence
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 11:10:14PM -0400, Ross Ridge wrote:
> Dustin Laurence wrote:
> >Yeah, though even that is more heavyweight than coroutines, so your job
> >is harder than mine.
>
> Hmm? I don't see how the "Lua-style" coroutines you're looking are any
> lightweight than what Maurizio Vita
Maurizio Vitale wrote:
> I'm looking at the very same problem, hoping to get very lightweight
> user-level threads for use in discrete event simulation.
Dustin Laurence wrote:
>Yeah, though even that is more heavyweight than coroutines, so your job
>is harder than mine.
Hmm? I don't see how th
On Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 09:50:29AM -0400, Maurizio Vitale wrote:
> I'm looking at the very same problem, hoping to get very lightweight
> user-level threads for use in discrete event simulation.
Yeah, though even that is more heavyweight than coroutines, so your job
is harder than mine. On the
I'm looking at the very same problem, hoping to get very lightweight
user-level threads for use in discrete event simulation.
It would be very nice if it was possible to write an inlined piece of
assembler that saved the program counter and the stack pointer and
then be able to say to GCC t
Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Dustin Laurence writes:
| > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 02:05:13PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
| >
| > > If every language were going to have the feature, then, moving it
| > > down into the mid-end or back-end might make sense, but I don't think
| > >
Dustin Laurence writes:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 02:05:13PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
>
> > If every language were going to have the feature, then, moving it
> > down into the mid-end or back-end might make sense, but I don't think
> > it does in this case.
>
> Personally, I'd like, an
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 05:34:41PM -0500, David Nicol wrote:
> On 6/16/06, Dustin Laurence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >...
> >is. :-) OTOH if it is possible I'd consider trying to write it, if my
> >GCC-fu ever reaches the requisite level (my rank is somewhere below
> >"pale piece of pigs ear"
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 02:05:13PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Dustin Laurence wrote:
> >I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand
>
> No, just hard work. It is only quicksand, if you start, but never
> finish.
It's quicksand if it turns out to vastly exc
Dustin Laurence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand, but I'll ask
> anyway...I'm interested in writing an FE for a language that has
> stackable coroutines (Lua-style, where you can yield and resume
> arbitrarily far down the call stack). I'm trying
On 6/16/06, Dustin Laurence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand, but I'll ask
anyway...I'm interested in writing an FE for a language that has
stackable coroutines (Lua-style, where you can yield and resume
arbitrarily far down the call stack). I'm try
On Jun 16, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Dustin Laurence wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand
No, just hard work. It is only quicksand, if you start, but never
finish.
The mechanism I might favor would be to handle all the fun inside the
language front end. Objective-C does t
12 matches
Mail list logo
