[chuck-users] Parallel Shreds

Stephen Sinclair radarsat1 at gmail.com
Thu Jan 29 09:50:42 EST 2009

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Tom Duff <td at pixar.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, Stephen Sinclair wrote:
>> It's parallel, but not concurrent. ... However, they don't run in
>> separate operating system threads, which would be "concurrent".
> Standard terminology in CS is more or less the reverse.  "Concurrent"
> means apparently happening at the same time, "parallel" means executing on
> more than one CPU.  Multi-threaded programs are concurrent, but they're
> only parallel if they're running on more than one core.

Sorry, my bad, maybe it is the other way around.

I think a big challenge for running shreds in parallel will be dealing
with memory issues.  Right now it's a big advantage that you can
access global variables and things within shreds without worrying
about clobbering other shreds, but this would be a problem with true
concurrency.  Perhaps the best solution would be transactional memory,
but it's quite hard to implement from what I understand.


More information about the chuck-users mailing list