functioncalls)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A month ago, Nathan Binkert wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be nicer to have a facility that let you send messages
> > between processes and manage concurrency properly instead? You'll
> > need
> > most of this anyway to do multithreading sanely, and the benefit
Evan Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Jan 31, 2005, at 0:17, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> The "just kidding" applies to the whole list, right? None of these
>> strike me as good ideas, except for improvements to function argument
>> passing.
>
> Really? You see no advantage to moving to garbag
Bob Ippolito wrote:
> Wouldn't it be nicer to have a facility that let you send messages between
> processes and manage
> concurrency properly instead? You'll need most of this anyway to do
> multithreading sanely, and
> the benefit to the multiple process model is that you can scale to multi
