D has moved up to number 18!

[Dave]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Dave wrote:
>> Dejan Lekic wrote:
>>> Mr. (or Mrs.) jcc7, thank you - i have tried to find that post 
>>> myself, but
>>> failed! :)
>>> Yes, that is a very nice thread, with many good ideas which followed.
>>> In short, the basic idea is to move thread support INTO the language.
>>> Best regards!
>>
>> I'd like to interject that, if more threading support is to be added 
>> to the language, it may be worthwhile to look into moving away from 
>> 'native threads' (including pthreads) into something more lightweight 
>> as the internal basis for D threading. Like the recently posted 
>> StackThreads library maybe(?). Many other languages (especially 
>> functional languages) are taking this approach - better performance, 
>> flexibility and portability.
> 
> Yes and no.  With the number of processors on average systems increasing 
> rapidly, there's definitely a place for kernel threads in today's world. 
>  IMO Solaris handles threading fairly well as it automatically uses both 
> user threads and kernel threads for the pthread API based on some system 
> knowledge and influenced by some API parameters.  I like this better 
> than cooperative user-level multithreading in most cases because it's 
> easier to use and more flexible for the platform design, though it isn't 
> quite so lightweight as mutexes and such must still be used.
> 

I just had reason to take a look at the Solaris thread stuff the other 
day. Pretty cool.

So, I guess the challenge may be to try and provide flexible enough 
language mods. and (a reference) rt lib/compiler interface to 
accommodate the best for a given platform?

>> IMHO, it be best to either a) release v1.0 w/ thread support as-is and 
>> redesign it for v2 or b) delay v1 until it has any improvements Walter 
>> may deem worthy, because I can only see MT as becoming hugely 
>> important in the next couple of years.
> 
> Definately.
> 
> 
> Sean