can clone a thread?

[Marco Leise]

Am Wed, 11 Dec 2013 09:10:09 +0100
schrieb "Gianni Pisetta" <pisetta.gianni at alice.it>:

> No, i think fork or something similar is the way i prefer to go.
> I'm working on a simple top-down parser, so i save all the data 
> references in the context of the function and at the end of it i 
> create the syntax tree object with all his childrens. So i have 
> the already allocated objects in the tls and the info on the 
> realtionships of these objects plus the parser state in the call 
> stack. I want to duplicate the parser because i want all the 
> possible syntax trees as a result and when the tokenizer will 
> find in the input two or more possible tokens, it must fork and 
> return for each thread one token from the possible ones. At the 
> end if one or more threads made to the end, each thread copy his 
> syntax tree on a shared array and the main thread then can work 
> on the results.
> 
> Another way to solve this is to move all the info from the call 
> stack to a stack managed by me, have a standard procedure that 
> fills the stack. When i must duplicate the thread i can create a 
> new one, make a deep copy of the objects in the stack and the 
> stack itself, then call the standard procedure again. But i think 
> this is a bottom-up parser and a major change in the application 
> design.
>
> For now i will stick with fork, if in the future a similar 
> function is implemented in core.thread, i will use it.

Alright, fork is optimized for this kind of stuff and it
should work fine. Personally I would likely have tried a
manged stack instead of cloning the whole application. How do
you write back the results from the child processes? Do you
use pipes or shared memory?

-- 
Marco