Re: v5.5.640 plans

[Gurusamy Sarathy <gsar@ActiveState.com>]

On Wed, 05 Jan 2000 16:35:34 EST, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 01:14 PM 1/5/00 -0800, Gurusamy Sarathy wrote:
>>On Wed, 05 Jan 2000 16:01:22 EST, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>> >Still, I gather this is all interim stuff, as I imagine 5.6 won't really
>> >have 2 different supported "threads" models.
>>
>>That's what I'm shooting for, but depending on how much work gets done
>>(or not done), we may or may not be able to lift the "experimental"
>>qualifier from the usethreads support.
>
>We're shooting for ithreads under the hood, right? Do we want to have both 
>the ithread model and current thread model visible from the perl level, or 
>just toss the current model entirely?

I think we want one supported model in the end.  But until the USE_ITHREADS
stuff has had a chance to catch up, I would like to keep both of them around.
There's no maintenance cost associated with USE_THREADS as it stands, since
it's all completely automated.  In some ways it would be more work to
remove it now than to keep it around until we really want to get rid
of it. :-)


Sarathy
gsar@ActiveState.com

---

References to:

Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org>

---

[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Top&Search][Original]

---