Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #50586

Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker

Path csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.forth
Subject Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:06:12 -0700
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Lines 14
Message-ID <87y43co557.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> (permalink)
References <7fddacae-373d-4cd5-a857-f4ae00486388@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain
Injection-Info mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="7bfc8f5b1c0c0e2e29d3a5c3abe51644"; logging-data="11723"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/r3E78vzAlULgqFm7mvqPb"
User-Agent Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock sha1:RPsZEeiRivk5INuxRnLUoKPcftU= sha1:9bLqI4Y37mdedNzLujbPxWbZxoA=
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.forth:50586

Show key headers only | View raw

foxaudioresearch@gmail.com writes:
> I would be interested to see if there is overlap in name choice and
> functionality and if others believe we should get some of this
> "standardized".

I had the impression that lots of people have been interested in
standardizing multi-tasking, but there was not enough agreement between
interested parties to agree on a specification.  

It would be nice if you could post some documentation of your word set.
I remember being impressed by how simple the eForth multi-tasker is.

I notice your word set doesn't seem to say anything about communication
between tasks, via mailboxes or whatever.

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-31 07:11 -0700
  Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-31 11:02 -0500
  Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-31 20:40 +0200
    Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-31 11:54 -0700
  Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker Gary Bergstrom <forthprgrmr@gmail.com> - 2016-08-31 11:34 -0700
  Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-31 17:06 -0700
    Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker josv@planet.nl - 2016-09-01 01:00 -0700
      Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-01 10:42 +0200
        Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-01 11:13 +0200
          Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 09:37 -0700
            Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-09-01 20:44 -0700
              Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-02 11:39 +0200
          Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 15:06 -0700
        Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker josv@planet.nl - 2016-09-01 03:11 -0700
    Re: POSIX vs Forth cooperative tasker foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 08:26 -0700

csiph-web