Re^2: The problem with "The Problem with Threads"

As the current implementation of threads tries to simulate parallelism within one interpreter,

After 24 hrs of thinking about that statement, I cannot make it gel with my knowledge that each thread starts a new interpreter.

Given it is you, I assume I'm just misunderstanding your drift?

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Comment on Re^2: The problem with "The Problem with Threads"

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: The problem with "The Problem with Threads" by Corion (Patriarch) on Jul 20, 2014 at 06:57 UTC
No, it was me who is simply wrong. Actually testing reveals that each thread really has its own namespace, like you say. So I'm less sure of where the actual problem or overhead lies with sharing data across threads, at least where the namespace is involved.	[reply]