On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 09:27:18AM +1100, James Cameron wrote:

> Yes, I know how to thread it, but having been there and done both
> threading and event driven models over my (ahem) 20 years professional
> programming career, I'm certain that an event driven model would be

"Sonny, back when I was a young man..."

> - Netrek does not need to restrict the developer base by choosing a
>   difficult technology.  We need to do the reverse.

> 	http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Ousterhout/Threads/


That's pretty funny.  Wizard?  Who calls programmers wizards these days?
I feel like I should grow a long(er) beard, put on a robe and wave my
large cane like an old geezer.

Wait a minute, I'm already a crusty old ...

> You start on the threading, I'll start on the event driven model.
> Show us the code.  Who will judge between us?

There is no real conceptual difference between using processes + signals
+ shm and threads + condition variables, both of which can be used to
simulate an event driven model under MP/MT.

I think the main reason to stay with processes is because it gives us
isolation.  ntserv still has bugs, and it's a good thing that a segfault
doesn't crash daemonII and other ntserv's.  Threads will hurt us there.

Dave Ahn | ahn at vec.wfubmc.edu | Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center

When you were born, you cried and the world rejoiced.  Try to live your life
so that when you die, you will rejoice and the world will cry.  -1/2 jj^2