Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #119126

Re: Threads across programming languages

From	David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: Threads across programming languages
Date	2024-05-15 11:20 +0200
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<v21upd$pnc1$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(19 earlier) <86cyppru3q.fsf@linuxsc.com> <v1vfqf$4eq2$1@dont-email.me> <f919090a93e5ab7c32c8961a6061c9e6e38c8fc4.camel@gmail.com> <v1vs6e$7b2f$1@dont-email.me> <126394fbbc6a61aa1257379032ed4fc43689a61c.camel@gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 14/05/2024 21:29, wij wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-05-14 at 16:24 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>> On 14/05/2024 13:46, wij wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2024-05-14 at 13:53 +0300, Paavo Helde wrote:
>>>> On 14.05.2024 05:43, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>> Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07.05.2024 01:13, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> C++ doesn't need nested functions because it has lambdas, which
>>>>>>> are effectively equivalent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lambdas are better than nested functions as one can specify explicitly
>>>>>> which variables are shared and how.  One can be lazy and pass [&], but
>>>>>> one doesn't have to.
>>>>>
>>>>> To me that sounds like all the complications of nested functions,
>>>>> and more besides, and no real advantages.  The choice of which
>>>>> variables to share is syntactic sugar, there is no difference
>>>>> in expressive power.
>>>>
>>>> Most of what programming languages do is syntactic sugar. For just
>>>> writing Turing complete code one programming language would be enough.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The primary goal of high level language should be for reducing software
>>> development/maintenance cost.
>>
>> Yes.  And the main way to do that is to reduce the risk of errors
>> passing into later stages of development.  A language (and the
>> programmer using the language) should aim to make it easy to write good
>> code, hard to write bad code, easy to see that good code is good, and
>> easy to see that bad code is bad.
> 
> Sounds like Bjarne Stroustrup's tongue.

I think it is a good aim for any programming language, so I am not 
surprised to see top language designers having similar opinions.

(Whether or not you think a given language succeeds in these goals is 
another matter.  And it's highly subjective, from experience, 
preferences, target applications and code type, and so on.)

> But I don't feel C++ is steering
> in that way. Since C++11 many features do not feel like what BS says in his
> book.

OK.  I think some are, some are not.  There's no doubt, however, that 
some features added to C++ are obscure, hard to understand and use, but 
were made primarily to support improving features that are easier and 
commonly used.  An example is rvalue references - they can often seem 
weird and it's not easy to know when they are a good idea or not.  But 
they make classes like std::vector<>, which are commonly used, more 
efficient.

> 
>> "Syntactic sugar" is vital to this effort.  And a key source of "power"
>> of a language is not in what it allows you do to, but in what it stops
>> you from doing, or allows you to restrict yourself.  For example, often
>> a correct program will work just as correctly, and just as efficiently,
>> if all uses of "const" are removed.  The "const" does not add to the
>> things the language can do - it helps by restricting the errors you can
>> make when using the language.
> 
> I agree what you say, but pretty much every high level language would say
> the same (how about BASIC?). 

I agree with that, which is pretty much the point - that's why we have 
high level languages.

> I am more concerned about the practical side.

Sure.

> 
>> So Tim is completely wrong to say that specifying the variables
>> accessible in a lambda gives "no real advantages".  It doesn't give the
>> compiler's code /generator/ any more information than it can deduce
>> itself from [&] or [=], but it gives more information to the compiler's
>> code /checker/ and to human programmers - those are big advantages and
>> greater expressive power.
> 
> Probably. I now still hesitate whether or not I should learn and adopt C++'s
> lambda expression. My consideration is that many new features after C++11
> are not really necessary and the burden may be greater than the gain for me.

I like lambdas on occasion.  I haven't found much use for them in my C++ 
programming, but that is probably just the kind of work I do using C++. 
I have had more use of them in my Python coding.

But they are like any other tool - a bit odd and hard to grasp when you 
are unfamiliar with them, then you get the idea and they are just 
another tool in the box, ready to use when they are the best fit for the 
task in hand.  Use them when they make the code clearer, don't use them 
when they make the code hard to follow.

> 
>>> Cpp is just having too many 'syntactic sugars'
>>> (and keep on adding it) to be away from this goal, IMO.
>>
>> C++ is a very big language, and gains new features (in the language and
>> standard library) every three years.  While some features make it easier
>> to write better code, backwards compatibility means it is rarely
>> possible to remove features that are no longer necessary.  Thus if you
>> want to be able to read and understand all the syntax of C++, it gets
>> more effort.  But if you are in the position to be able to deal with C++
>> code using only the features you find useful and like, then that is much
>> less of an issue.
> 
> I am not optimistic about the future of C++.

I am - there are some things, like reflection and contracts, that I 
think will be /very/ nice.  But I also expect to see many new features 
that I won't have much use for, as always.  No one uses everything in 
big languages.

(When I started in embedded development, I worked in assembly.  You 
could know /everything/ about the microcontroller you were using - every 
single instruction in the processor, every peripheral on the chip. 
/Every/ instruction executed by the microcontroller was one you wrote 
explicitly.  It was nice to know everything.  But such times are past, 
like it or not.)

> 
>> It's primarily when dealing with smart-arse
>> programmers like Bonita that it is a real problem.  (But such
>> programmers can also write smart-arse code in C and any other language
>> they use.)
>>
>>> Putting the 'expressivness' aside, I think cpp cannot complete with C and
>>> Assembly if measuring the compiled code size and speed. But I still like to
>>> program in cpp for my own reasons.
>>>
>>
>> If your C++ code is more than marginally slower than equivalent C code
>> in situations where the speed is important, then you are using C++
>> incorrectly.  It's not uncommon for C++ to pull in a whole lot of extra
>> library code, but that is rarely significant on PC's or other "big"
>> computers.
>>
>> It is perhaps easier to accidentally write code that is big and slow in
>> C++ than it is in C, but it is certainly not necessary.
> 
> My concern is that C++ codes typically consumes more memory much less
> proportional than the speed gain.

I think it is hard to define "typically".  But I think you will have to 
justify your claims here with some examples.  (I don't mean detailed 
code or analysis, just rough descriptions of your thought processes here.)

It's useful to remember that just about anything that can be written in 
C, can be written in C++ with /very/ little overhead.  If you are 
concerned that using a std::vector<> will chew up excess memory compared 
to a manual call to malloc(), you can make the malloc() call in C++. 
You can also make it a bit safer and easier to use by wrapping it in a 
class and using a std::unique_ptr<> to ensure it gets freed at the right 
time.  And you get this with no measurable extra cost.

> Basically, time*space=constant, 

Um, no, that is not generally true.

But sometimes you can make trade-offs between speed and space (either 
data space or code space).  Again, if you can choose a particular 
balance in C, you can choose the same balance in C++ - though the 
default, simpler or more idiomatic C++ code might have a different 
balance than you might have chosen in C.

> which is
> especially observable for computation intensive problems. I am more concerned
> about the cost of problem solving instead of plain code analysis.
> 
>> And while it occasionally makes sense to use assembly for the most
>> time-critical parts of code, it is very common for clear, maintainable C
>> or C++ code to be /faster/ than clear, maintainable assembly code.
>>
>> Unless you are dealing with something that makes use of processor
>> instructions or features that are unknown to the C/C++ compiler, writing
>> assembly code that is faster than C or C++ will often require such
>> specific care for things like instruction scheduling, register pressure,
>> cache prefetching, etc., than your results will be far from clear or
>> maintainable.  And by the time you've got it working, the end user has
>> bought a new PC and the processor has different numbers of execution
>> units and more specialised instructions.  You can re-write much of the
>> assembly, or you can re-compile your C/C++ with a different "-march=" flag.
> 
> To me, there is no clear cut saying which (assembly or C/C++) is better just
> from the view point of common capabilities mutual to low/high level languages.
> (there are many capabilities C/C++ cannot do, typically involving hardware
> capabilities, virus, anti-interference, simulation,...)

Sure - there are times that assembly is essential.  But usually you try 
to minimise that in your code.

> It all depends on what kind of application is desired.
> Generally, I feel software projects within 6-man-month are no difference from
> the language choice. One can also program assembly as fast.

There is a vague rule of thumb that people experienced in a programming 
language can write at roughly the same rate in terms of lines of code 
per unit time, and that bug rates are roughly proportional to the number 
of lines of code.  It is a statistical pattern, not a law, but it is 
generally the case that it is more efficient for programmers to use the 
highest level language that is suitable for the task at hand, at least 
as far as the coding is concerned.  (Things like system design, 
algorithm design, etc., are mostly independent of the programming 
language - if these dominate the development time, then the language 
makes little difference.)

> Those said, I retired earily (at about 37), I use C++ exclusively since then.
> Many are from my memory and what I received and my observations.
> 
>

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-04-29 19:13 +0300
  Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-04-29 20:29 +0000
    Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-29 13:33 -0700
      Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-04-29 22:41 +0000
        Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-29 16:46 -0700
          Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-04-30 00:11 +0000
      Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 06:54 +0200
        Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-01 07:10 +0000
          Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 10:13 +0200
            Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-01 08:53 +0000
              Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 10:59 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-01 20:34 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 05:45 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-02 15:53 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 17:10 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-02 23:24 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-03 09:38 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 09:58 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-03 11:18 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 13:23 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-03 18:01 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 17:18 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-03 22:20 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-04 20:41 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-05 01:41 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-05 10:38 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-05 12:37 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-05 13:00 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-13 00:43 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-13 15:04 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 16:52 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-17 22:18 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-17 22:17 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-06 15:13 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-07 08:41 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-07 11:00 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-13 19:43 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 04:59 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-21 16:39 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-14 13:53 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 13:42 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 19:55 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 14:11 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 20:16 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 16:02 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 13:34 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 19:46 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 14:13 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 20:28 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-14 16:24 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 03:29 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-14 23:34 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 08:31 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 18:16 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 06:26 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-15 11:06 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-21 16:34 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 18:43 -0500
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 06:25 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-15 20:48 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 06:23 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 21:37 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 19:57 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 20:07 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 17:33 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 08:43 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 17:55 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 10:31 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-15 11:20 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 22:38 +0800
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-15 20:46 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 21:51 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-03 19:30 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-06-04 09:03 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-15 14:24 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-21 19:26 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-05-21 20:27 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-22 11:43 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-06-01 21:03 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-02 23:21 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 08:45 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 09:05 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 09:09 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-04 02:33 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 20:05 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 20:07 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 20:09 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 06:00 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 21:19 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-05 01:40 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 22:23 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-02 05:39 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 07:53 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-02 23:16 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 09:00 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-04 02:30 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 20:36 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-04 04:46 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 21:50 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 06:00 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 21:27 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 13:28 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-02 23:15 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 16:58 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-05-03 00:15 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 17:22 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 00:07 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-03 02:25 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 12:33 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-05-07 20:48 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-03 10:34 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-03 18:05 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 17:20 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-03 18:47 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-03 22:19 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-05-04 00:27 +0100
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-04 22:04 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-05-05 14:56 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 17:36 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-04 22:11 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 12:59 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 22:20 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 22:22 -0700
              Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 11:55 -0700
        Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 11:55 -0700
    Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 06:53 +0200
      Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-01 07:09 +0000
        Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 10:11 +0200
          Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-01 08:53 +0000
            Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-01 11:00 +0200
              Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-01 20:31 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-05-01 21:00 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-05-02 00:05 +0300
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-01 23:05 +0000
                Re: Threads across programming languages Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 05:46 +0200
                Re: Threads across programming languages "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-02 13:33 -0700
                Re: Threads across programming languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-05-03 22:22 +0000
  Re: Threads across programming languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-04-30 16:48 +0000

csiph-web