Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems to me that there are several advantages to making a group of
multi with the same short name a single object, of type
MultiSub|MultiMethod, which internally holds references to the all the
various routines that share that
Uri Guttman wrote:
"RA" == Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Except then the client wanted it to work under Win32, where I've
never trusted any of the pseudo-forks that perl did (esp with
Network I/O going on). So I rewrote the whole thing in a language
that supported th
Uri Guttman wrote:
"RA" == Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
that is not the only way as i have pointed out. it is just a way that is
promoted heavily (like java). events if done correctly are generaly
faster than threads and use much less ram (no stack context created for
e
Dan Sugalski wrote:
They'll live. Python and Ruby both have a single global interpreter lock
and nobody much cares.
People won't move to parrot because of signal or thread support, or
because we give them a cookie. People will move to parrot because it
runs perl 6, or because it gives them cro
