home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu.tar
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
icon
/
newsgrp
/
group98c.txt
/
000028_icon-group-sender _Tue Sep 15 09:00:31 1998.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2000-09-20
|
2KB
Return-Path: <icon-group-sender>
Received: from kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU (kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU [192.12.69.239])
by baskerville.CS.Arizona.EDU (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA00809
for <icon-group-addresses@baskerville.CS.Arizona.EDU>; Tue, 15 Sep 1998 09:00:30 -0700 (MST)
Received: by kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU (5.65v4.0/1.1.8.2/08Nov94-0446PM)
id AA03147; Tue, 15 Sep 1998 09:00:02 -0700
From: gep2@computek.net
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 23:15:51 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199809150415.XAA12328@mail.cmpu.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Context Switching
To: icon-group@optima.CS.Arizona.EDU
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: icon-group-errors@optima.CS.Arizona.EDU
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO
> Does it really require threads to do context switching?
Well, MAYBE not, but that's probably one of the easier ways to implement them.
> I can see the possibility, but it's not as though the context switching that
happens in Icon requires a "whole separate executable," is it?
It certainly would NOT _require_ a separate executable.
> I have written subroutines in C that use static local variables to
remember their "current state," so that every time you call them, they
remember what was going on at the last call, and just pick up from
there. They work like charms.
> It seems to me something similar could happen in Icon without the
complication of threads.
> Maybe I'm missing something fundamental about the purpose of context
switching in Icon? I haven't been using the language all that long.
It's more complicated than one might imagine due to the fact (to name just one
example) that a given routine can be entered recursively, and that there is no
guarantee that the recursions (and returns) will all be properly nested.
Gordon Peterson
http://www.computek.net/public/gep2/
Support the Anti-SPAM Amendment! Join at http://www.cauce.org/