develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from January 2001

Re: Does perl really need to use sigsetjmp? (18% performance hit)

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Alan Burlison
January 21, 2001 09:02
Re: Does perl really need to use sigsetjmp? (18% performance hit)
Message ID:
Nicholas Clark wrote:

> Hangon. Is this perl6 now? Which list should it get to?
> I was meaning it more as an analogy, for stuff that shouldn't leak if
> an eval dies. But it's not a great one, as you can eval inside an eval.
> And only perl internals stuff. I was meaning that this was "implementation"
> and perl scripts don't get to see it.

Kinda both.  Perl5 threads are irredeemably broken, and IMHO should be
excised from the source as soon as possible - leaving them in only gives
the mistaken impression that they might actually work some day.  The
MT-unsafe behaviour of the current eval mechanism when used with threads
is just one of the reasons why they are so broken.

As for perl6, there has been discussion of using the same sort of
brokenness there too.  The only model that seems to make sense to me is
the interpreter per thread model, with new language syntax for shared
state, such as variables visible to more than one interpreter.  One
advantage of the vtbl model being suggested is such things become much
easier to do.

Alan Burlison

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About