threading

[Rustom Mody]

On Wednesday, April 9, 2014 4:02:10 AM UTC+5:30, Sturla Molden wrote:
> On 08/04/14 22:30, Grant Edwards wrote:

> >>> Unix maybe, but what about Windows? Is it efficient to create
> >>> processes under Windows?
> >> Processes are very heavy-weight on Windows.
> > Not surprising given its VMS heritage.  I remember running shell
> > scripts under VMS on a VAX-11/780 that took hours to do what would
> > have taken minutes on an LSI-11 running Unix.  The whole Unix "small
> > tools working together" paradigm is based on the assumption that
> > process creation and death are fast and cheap.

> That is one reason software tend to be monolithic on Windows, including 
> build tools.

> Running a configure script used to take forever, but thankfully 
> computers are getting faster.

I was looking at Erlang...
And under similar presumptions that I see on this thread (in a different sense!)
viz.: Either the messiness of callback hell or the error-proneness of threads

However this was Erlang whose basic premise is to question this either-or.

And so I was properly told-off by Joe Armstrong
(roughly the equivalent of being told off by Guido out here :-) )

http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2012-October/069560.html

Note Erlang, Go and Cloud-haskell all set out along a similar route:
http://joneisen.tumblr.com/post/38188396218/concurrency-models-go-vs-erlang