On 30-May-08, at 8:22 AM, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
>
> Joe Strout wrote:
>
>> Get over it. Preemptive multitasking is, in general, very bad mojo.
>> If you access ANY functions that are not thread-safe (and this would
>> include pretty much the entire framework, as well as many of the OS
>> functions that you use even for simple things like drawing to a
>> window), then your program will have obscure bugs that will crop
>> up in
>> odd circumstances after your software is released. The Windows
>> platform layer used to use preemptive threads, and it was a nightmare
>> -- one that ended only when they coded a cooperative multitasking
>> system like the Mac already had.
>
> Could you elaborate on this? I thought all NT lineage was preemptively
> multitasking, with a Win16 compatibility system for older applications
> that was cooperatively multitasked within itself...?
Sure
An RB app on Windows isn't internally preemptively threaded
>> To make use of multiple processors safely (in ANY language), you need
>> to divide your work into separate processes. In RB, the best way to
>> do this is via a helper app that you would access via the Shell.
>> It's
>> not that hard to do, and it's 100% safe.
>
> You're saying design your app to be multiprocess and not
> multithreaded?
In RB thats how you use multiple processors at present
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|