In our last disagreement you would not even so much as recognize my arguments about context, just completely ignoring anything I said. And there you were taking one phrase out of its qualifying context. Here I am making an objection to a complete thought that was part of your reply to the OP; yes, not one pertinent to your main point.
Why am I doing so? Because you seem to have elected yourself defender of ithreads to the point where you attack even true and reasonable cautionary points about them with a variety of shenanigans designed more to conceal than expose truth. The truth is that ithreads are a very different beast than people coming from other languages may expect. They are slow to start and tend to cause memory bloat. Anywhere there is support for copy-on-write fork, fork and some variety of IPC is almost always a better choice.
If that's politics, so be it. Don't bother responding, I'm not going to read it.
In reply to Re^4: Is Using Threads Slower Than Not Using Threads?
by ysth
in thread Is Using Threads Slower Than Not Using Threads?
by Dru
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |