Re: [ID 19991229.003] perl 5.005_03 core dumps -- signal

[Nick Ing-Simmons <nick@ing-simmons.net>]

Joshua N Pritikin <joshua.pritikin@db.com> writes:
>On Wed, Jan 12, 2000 at 11:01:16AM +0000, Tim.Bunce@ig.co.uk wrote:
>> 
>> My (vague) impression is that that work fragmented with one group adding
>> features and others being unhappy that there were too many features.
>> I think it's lost direction and consensus support. Sadly.
>
>That's news to me.  Granted, there was heated discussion for a few
>months but I believe most folks are now mostly satisfied with the design
>and implementation.  Graham, Nick, Gisle and others, feel free to
>correct me or forever hold your peace.  ;-)

I am in both camps - on the one hand it is my _impression_ that Event 
needs more functionality before I can use it to replace the Tcl event C
code that is at the core of perl/Tk. On the other hand I feel that 
what we have is over complex. But I have not actually tried to 
use Event in anger yet so it is not really fair to judge.

>Furthermore, Event tries
>to ignore the implications of multiple threads as much as possible.  

Which is a weakness. Modern Tcl/Tk can at least "tolerate" multiple threads.
(Multiple threads are almost mandatory as work-rounds to Win32 issues.)
Thus Event should probably use the C level mutex stuff from the perl core
where appropriate. That said until thread support in the core settles
down I can understand Joshua's reluctance to mess with threads.

>
>I have little idea about Win32.  

Which is another weakness. If Event offered a solution to perl/Tk's Win32
woes I would be much more motivated to use it.

>Personally, I am not interested in
>doing a port.  No volunteer has stepped forward so perhaps we can strike
>a deal with Microsoft to commission the work.  At least I can parrot
>from those more knowledgable that the Win32 model is *significant*
>different than Unix.  

It may be so different that the current abstractions make no sense.

I think we have a nasty case of chicken-and-egg here:

Event is not finished till it can do Win32.
Cannot do Win32 without threads.
Threads seem to need Event ...

Thus I suspect that what it really needs is ActiveState (e.g. Sarathy),
to need something working ...

-- 
Nick Ing-Simmons

---

Follow-Ups from:

Gurusamy Sarathy <gsar@ActiveState.com>

References to:

Larry Wall <larry@wall.org>
Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@ig.co.uk>
Joshua N Pritikin <joshua.pritikin@db.com>

---

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

---