std.parallelism changes done

[Michel Fortin]

On 2011-03-24 03:29:52 -0400, Sönke Ludwig 
<ludwig at informatik.uni-luebeck.de> said:

> Hm depending on the way the pool is used, it might be a better default 
> to have the number of threads equal the number of cpu cores. In my 
> experience the control thread is mostly either waiting for tasks or 
> processing messages and blocking in between so it rarely uses a full 
> core, wasting the available computation time in this case.
> 
> However, I'm not really sure if it is like this for the majority of all 
> applications or if there are more cases where the control thread will 
> continue to do computations in parallel. Maybe we could collect some 
> opinions on this?

The current default is good for command line applications where the 
main thread generally blocks while you're doing your work. The default 
you're proposing is good when you're using the task pool to pile up 
tasks to perform in background, which is generally what you do in an 
event-driven application. The current default is good to keeps simpler 
the simpler programs which are more linear in nature.

My use case is like yours: a event-driven main thread which starts 
tasks to be performed in the background.

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://michelf.com/