Joe is right tho, and is just an opinion. Plus if you want to make it
work, there are ways to make it work.
To say "it is incredible, and unacceptable!!" is equally an opinion.
Giovanni
----------------------
Seth Willits wrote:
> On May 30, 2008, at 7:18 AM, Joe Strout wrote:
>
>
>>> A lot of messages on this list claimed about the fact that RB does
>>> not use more than one processor (or one core) at a time. it is
>>> incredible and unacceptable !!
>>>
>> Get over it. Preemptive multitasking is, in general, very bad mojo.
>> If you access ANY functions that are not thread-safe .... then
>> your program will have obscure bugs that will crop up in
>> odd circumstances after your software is released.
>>
>
> And yet all those developers (including myself) are able to work
> within the limitations fine.
>
> My interpretation of this answer totally boiled down to "you're too
> naiive to understand how bad threads are." Arguing that for 99% of the
> REALbasic's customers the cooperative model is just fine, or that it's
> simply too big of a time and cost tradeoff to make the core
> foundations of the framework thread-safe, is one thing, but to say
> "it's too hard and you're going to fail" is rather silly.
>
> Just because they're not trivial to use seems like a poor argument to
> not have them.
>
>
> Just my two cents,
>
> --
> Seth Willits
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|