Re:Why Threads Are a Bad Idea (1995) [pdf]
by squirrelicus on Wednesday June 13, 2018 @12:55AM
(#17300371)
Interesting. Fundamentally, in order to achieve async io, a continuation is necessary. Syntax may hide this (e.g. async/await), or make it apparent as in callbacks/promises. I can't blame JavaScript for not having syntax that makes async pretty.
That being said, if we're talking not about IO, but about cpu/memory bound problems... Well I'd be lying if I said it was uncommon in my career to come across people who assumed, to the detriment of simplicity, quality, and performance, that a calculation (e.g. process a list mapping op with AsParallel/parallelStream) would be aided by parallelism. That is just ignorance by Dunning-Kreuger devs who don't apply a critical eye to their own experiences.
Re:Why Threads Are a Bad Idea (1995) [pdf]
by jstewartmobile on Wednesday June 13, 2018 @02:33AM
(#17300762)
You're focusing on performance. Performance is not the world. Parallelism is not the only reason to use cooperating processes. There are other considerations--like task fairness, and isolation.
We desperately need more isolation in software.
Re:Why Threads Are a Bad Idea (1995) [pdf]
by squirrelicus on Wednesday June 13, 2018 @12:10PM
(#17304392)
Absolutely. I agree.
Wasn't projecting async all the way down to IO primitives.
Commented because most of the debate seems to be threads vs callbacks--with processes being unwisely overlooked.