Awesome, I didn't know about thread groups. I'll check into that as an
option. I appreciate all your help!
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 2:14:17 PM UTC-6, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> At Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:01:20 -0600, Robert D Kocisko wrote:
> > My only concern with this
ented by incremental operations on an epoll object (or kqueue
> object, etc.), and each blocking thread will be descheduled until a
> semaphore post re-schedules it. But if you already have an epoll object
> and the code to handle it, then you don't need the semaphore-based
> machin
then
> you can block on a set using `sync`, etc.
>
> Matthew
>
> At Mon, 3 Aug 2020 23:31:20 -0700 (PDT), Robert D Kocisko wrote:
> > I have an existing c++ app that is entirely event-loop driven with epoll
> > and I am trying to figure out how to integrate Racket in the same thread
I have an existing c++ app that is entirely event-loop driven with epoll
and I am trying to figure out how to integrate Racket in the same thread
and allow the existing code to work as-is. I have read the docs about the
C api and the FFI but so far a straightforward and clean option is not
app
4 matches
Mail list logo
