[openbeos] Re: Thread on OsNews...
- From: revol@xxxxxxx
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 18:28:54 +0200 (MEST)
> >Yes, ex-Be engineer, and probably ex-Be engineer forever.
> Ouch!, that line sounded bitter.
I hope not forever ! [Uncle Sam pointing his finger /]
[Uncle Sam voice] WE NEED YOU ! [/Uncle Sam voice] :))
> I think the article shows that people have different tastes.
> ie: Multithreading vs. Non.
Well I'm more used to monotask programming in C (even under UNIX), but I
begun C++ under BeOS 2 months ago and I really liked it:
http://clapcrest.free.fr/revol/shot_nplay2.png
(someone said multithreading ? Hugh :)) )
I also have some experience on multiprocessing on the kernel side:
http://lpg.ticalc.org/prj_prosit/index.html
I mean processes appear as threads for the kernel anyway, and this is even
more obvious on platforms like this one which lacks an MMU. :-D
I don't know if you can imagine the feeling you have when you see all those
user proggies running smoothly altogether, and knowing that "Yeah they run
thanks to what I coded" :))
But I really understand some people feel confused by all those concepts and
obscure terms (I'm still not sure I know what a spinlock is, or maybe I
already know but I never put this name on it).
> Personally I'm quite comfortable debugging multithreaded apps.
Debugging also changes some habits.
> The concept of parallelism will become very important as operating
> systems and programs become more distributed. This is already
> happening in business and science applications.
> A multithreaded OS starts us off on the right foot as far as I can
> see.
> This kind of multithreading also lends itself to the even distribution
> of workload across multiple processors, which BeOS excels at.
When will we see BeOS based clusters btw ? It would rock !
François.
Other related posts:
