News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The future of M:N threading by jmount on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @01:00PM (#6727013)
I can't find the reference, but I remember a grand old rant that threads only progressed so far because Solaris at the time had an very costly process-fork cost compared to other Unices and Windows.
Re:The future of M:N threading by zokier on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @04:11PM (#6728557)
Process spawning has been (and still is!) quite expensive on Windows, I've always associated the push for threads with that, ie being kludge for crappy kernels :)
Re:The future of M:N threading by dbaupp on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @08:56PM (#6730039)
What about shared memory?
Re:The future of M:N threading by jmount on Saturday November 16, 2013 @10:29AM (#6745046)
True: forks have very different semantics than threads. Just thought the thread architecture would be less complicated if divisions of responsibilities were different.