Re: Concurrent Sequential

"Traveler" <traveler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:eqn6i3lrjvuqbmcnol95414r298a66ad1v@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:55:23 -0000, Roger <hpsham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[...]
Now, I have been saying for years that this is the proper approach to
parallelism. The thread-based approach to parallelism is one of the
worst things to have happened to computer programming. The 2-buffer
approach I describes above eliminates all the problems (e.g.,
deadlocks) that plague thread-based concurrency because it makes it
easy to enforce deterministic timing, an absolute must for
reliability.

[...]

You are NOT skilled in the art of multi-threading in any way, shape or form! Of course you think its bad. You have no idea how to program threads in an effective and efficient manner. You think deadlocking is a problem? LOL!!! Its a problem for the lon list of people who do not know how to properly use mutual exclusion techniques. Unfortunately, that list induces you! Do not trash multi-threading when you do not know how to program locks.

.