in reply to Re^3: Tk and Threads (again)
in thread Tk and Threads (again)

Then it's possible I was doing something wrong to produce the clunky thread behavior I was seeing (with the timeslices not being distributed very well),

I don't suppose you retained the code?

Unfortunately about 95% of the bad press that Perl's threads get is due to people writing poor code and then blaming threads. Or worse, people who have never attempted to write a threaded Perl program, reporting and re-reporting the same three bad experiences of those brave souls that did try them--over and over and over.

or else Windows threads just do that.

No, There is nothing wrong with windows scheduling. And that is even more pervasive.

If those that have switched to Linux had put as much effort into understanding their win32 systems as they are forced to learn about their *nix systems before they can do the simplest task, they may well have found that they didn't need to switch in the first place.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Tk and Threads (again)
by Courage (Parson) on Jan 23, 2006 at 16:50 UTC
[reply]

      A perfect example of exactly what I mean.

      Now read the things you need to know about that "things you need to know" post and tell me if you still think that digging up that old, outdated thread from 2 1/2 years and 6 major releases of Perl ago is still relevant?

      • Have you (or liz) tried threads in the interim?
      • Do you feel that you are conveying timely and pertinent information? Or just grinding an axe?
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]
        I haven't read your post, now I did.
        ++, interesting read, I mostly agree with many points of that
        Still, I am not agree to waste plenty of resources just to accomplish some simple tasks. I do not want to get rid of car and use trucks just because I decided to pack my small boxes into huge containers.

        Closer to your current point, there were no "6 major releases of Perl".
        You probably meant some maintenance releases between 5.8.0 and 5.8.7?
        Those are even not a minor releases, those are even less than that, those are maintenance, or patch releases (in my, probably broken, classification).

        Did I tried threading recently? - yes, I did, in 5.8.6
        As you already guessed, I failed, namely within Tk+Threads on Win32.
        My attempt will probably fit into your classification of incorrect attempts, but, in my opinion, those were sane enough.

        On the other side, I agree with an opinion that threads will mature faster if larger user base will be; and any support will stuck if all refuse trying.

        add: sorry for my unperfect English. Some people say it is unperfect but perfectly adequate, I don't know :)
        All I do know - I am unperfect :):):)

        Best regards,
        Courage, the Cowardly Dog

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom