Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:58:42 +0200 (CEST) | From | Igmar Palsenberg <> | Subject | Re: thread rant |
| |
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Michael Bacarella wrote:
> > Q: Why do we need threads? > A: Because on some operating systems, task switches are expensive.
No. threads share variable and code memory, processes do not. And sometimes it can make your life a lot easier. Even if you can use things such as SHM or so.
> Q: So, threads are a hack to get around operating systems that suck? > A: Basically.
I don't agree.
> Q: So, why must Linux support threads? > A1: : | > A2: So other programs can be easily ported to Linux! > > That can already happen. It's not the *best* implementation. It's > not as fast as it can be. But it works. And that's all it should do. If > you're not happy, cope. > > "But threads on this system are faster than on Linux!" > > The fact that the system implements threads speaks enough about > it's capabilities. ie, it's trying hard to suck less. So, from my POV, > we're looking to make Linux suck more by effectively emulating systems > that are trying to suck less. > > But, I've never done anything worthwhile for Linux, so take this for what > it's worth, from an asshole. > -MB
Igmar
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |