3 Apr
2006
3 Apr
'06
6:38 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 01:15:03PM -0800, John Meacham wrote:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 04:21:26PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
Great. Apart from my misgivings about allowing cooperative scheduling at all, here's a few comments on the proposal:
much much preferable to a standard that not everyone can implement. :)
Are there potential users for the compromise interface? I had the impressions that those wanting concurrency needed the fairness guarantees.