claird / starbase.neosoft.com (Cameron Laird) wrote:
>
>In article <LAW2-F88rQ1LQGsAtej00003f23 / hotmail.com>,
>Ben Tilly <ben_tilly / hotmail.com> wrote:
>			.
>			.
>			.
> >Perl's lack of stable threading makes it unsuitable for all
> >but the simplest GUI applications.  Tk is a good fit for
> >very simple applications.
>			.
>I don't get your point.  I agree that Perl's threading
>has a way to go, although it might be better now than
>you realize.  Are you proposing that threading is the
>only legitimate concurrency model for sophisticated GUI
>work?  That's ... well, that's not how I think about
>GUIs.

Well judging from the rants and complaints on p5p,
Perl's threading model is very much in flux, compiling
with threading is a huge performance hit, there are a
ton of bugs, and there is no guarantee that 6.0 will
even bother trying to be compatible.

Realizing all of that is sufficient reason not to use
Perl's threading in anything you care about...

And yes, I am claiming that interesting GUIs eventually
find that pre-emptive multi-tasking (often done with
threading) is important.

Cheers,
Ben
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com