I really sincerely hope this doesn't come off as sarcastic, but...

How do you interpret those?
Well... depends on surrounding context. :-) I've not read the source code, but I'll play anyway.

Create a local copy of the PMC if necessary. (No copy is made if it is marked shared.) This includes workarounds for Parrot_clone() not doing the Right Thing with subroutines (specifically, code segments aren't preserved and it is difficult to do so as long as Parrot_clone() depends on freezing).

Well on first glance that comment seems to hark back to iThreads' "copy unshared data by default" nastiness... but on second reading (without better context) they're talking about PMCs that represent user code.

Fixup a PMC to be sharable. Right now, reassigns the vtable to one owned by some master interpreter, so the PMC can be safely reused after thread death.
I think it's clear that this comment pertains to the "shared everything" model rather than the "shared nothing model". It also sounds like exactly what I'd do for a "shared interpreter pool" scenario in a "shared everything" model.

In the future the PMC returned might be different than the one passed, e.g., if we need to reallocate the PMC in a different interpreter.
I definitely cannot devine any meaning from that one... what specifically about those words gives you pause?

In short, I definitely wouldn't interpret those comments (together or separately) to mean as you've concluded. I'd need much more context (and naturally to read the damn code) before I made any such conclusion.

Actually, if I must interpret those comments as a whole (a silly exercise at best), I get the following:

You see how I did that? ;) I got a completely different meaning from the same comments.

Seriously though, it's not like there's a CMM traceability document tying specific parts of the parrot implementation to words in the TDD... the parrot development has been highly incremental, striving for specific goals at each stage. I can only go by the discussion I read in the group's threads.

Larry (below) has put my mind at ease about perl6 wrt concurrency, so now I guess I'll just pay a bit more attention to the relevant groups to see what's really going on wrt concurrency in parrot.

-David

In reply to Re^3: Slow evolution of Perl = Perl is a closed Word (NQP, parrot concurrency == Oh dear.) by erroneousBollock
in thread Slow evolution of Perl = Perl is a closed Word by Anonymous Monk

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.