lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Alan Cox quote? (was: Re: accounting for threads)
    On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 08:18:59PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
    > There I disagree. Threads introduce parallelism that the majority of user
    > space programmers have trouble getting right (not that C is helpful here).

    I think it depends on the application. In the RT space the concept
    Do this every millisecond starting now
    Do this every 500 us starting in 30 microseconds
    is pretty clear and simple.

    > A threaded program has a set of extremely complex hard to repeat timing based
    > behaviour dependancies. An unthreaded app almost always does the same thing on
    > the same input. From a verification and coverage point of view that is
    > incredibly important.

    Depends on the design. I'm sure you've seen some impressively obscure examples of the
    "do everything in an event loop" style of programming that is common in embedded.

    To me this is like the arguments people used to have over recursion and the answer is
    the same:

    Bad programmers can make any programming construct worse

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:55    [W:4.886 / U:0.568 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site