On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Hugh Sasse wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
>
>> "Zed A. Shaw" <zedshaw / zedshaw.com> writes:
>> 
>>> This basically means that, I have three choices as I see it:
>>> 
>>> 	1) Ruby/Event becomes completely evil and redefines Thread's
>>> 	initialize so that it throws an exception telling you to not use
>>> 	threads.  Ugh.
>> 
>>> 	2) Implement DRb using Myriad so that people can get the advantages of
>>> 	threads without using them.  Also ugh.  No
>        [...]
>> 
>>> 	3) Abandon Ruby/Event entirely and just base a new implementation of
>>> 	Myriad on the Ruby thread stuff.  I know you
>        [Performance implication...]
>> 
>> Or,     4) Become a great Ruby hacker and replace the Ruby thread select()
>> completely with libevent. ;-)
>> 
>  or,   5) Contribute to the threading code in some other way which would
>  make life easier for people including yourself.
>
> This is suggested because you seem to have familiarity with the issue that
> multithreaded programs create, which is a subtle area, so you could well
> provide something helpful.  Obviously the main obstacle is becoming familiar
> enough with the internals that you can do this confidently, but it sounds
> like you are well on the way there already, if you haven't actually arrived.

other than liscense issues - i wonder why not build upon a library which
already deals with these issue such as the apache portable runtime (apr)?
building ontop of this, for example, would give not only portable threads, but
mmap routines, file locking, iconv, etc, etc.

   http://apr.apache.org/

regards.

-a
-- 
===============================================================================
| email :: ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
| phone :: 303.497.6469
| Your life dwells amoung the causes of death
| Like a lamp standing in a strong breeze.  --Nagarjuna
===============================================================================