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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #50247

Re: the IS-A function

Show all headers | View raw

On 8/19/2016 3:01 AM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:

> I don't foresee providing Straight Forth with support for multi-core systems --- that is too difficult (a bit more sophisticated than a blue-collar guy like me wants to delve into), and it puts a straight-jacket on the programs (making data immutable so one process doesn't clobber another process).
> 1.) Multi-core support is not necessary for the primary purpose of Straight Forth (cross-compilers), and I don't want to add extra complexity that will get in the way of my primary purpose for no benefit.
> 2.) Multi-core support is not necessary for the secondary purpose of Straight Forth (numeric and text processing) because performance isn't all that crucial. The only program I have in mind is CAM (generating gcode for CNC machines), and this is not time-critical. Even if Oforth given a dual-core system is twice the speed of Straight Forth, nobody will care --- the difference is 1 minute compared to 2 minutes to generate a gcode program --- ease of development of the CAM script is much more important.
>
> What do you use Oforth for that is so speed-critical that your multi-core support is necessary?
>
Multi-threading which is what really going on is quite useful in many 
applications that need to carry on more than one task smoothly, web 
applications has been mentioned but in many others it can be useful.

In NC applications for example you want to keep the machine position, or 
be moving along a path, while preparing the next move, while also 
monitoring the keyboard for operator actions, and while communicating 
with a PC or another  machine to download the next program to run, 
multi-threading allows all those processes to run simultaneously and 
smoothly. As far as other cores the OS takes care of that, you ask to 
run another thread and the OS decides to use another core or not based 
on software load, your software need not be concerned the OS takes care 
of where the thread runs.

Cooperative multitasking can in many simple cases be used but sometimes 
that doesn't work well, in NC example the thread that keeps the position 
or makes a move, must be executed on schedule by an accurate timer to 
keep the system stable so co-operative multitasking will not work for 
that task, an interrupt driven task is necessary.

Personally not having multi-threading will limit the applications one 
can write that will run well and run smoothly, its another vital tool in 
a modern programming task just as libraries, and other items are.
-- 
Cecil - k5nwa

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

Thread

the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 23:10 -0700
  Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-16 00:22 -0700
  Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-16 14:01 -0700
  Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-16 14:20 -0700
    Re: the IS-A function JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-08-17 05:04 -0700
      Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 10:52 -0700
        Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 19:31 -0700
      Re: the IS-A function anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-18 08:00 +0000
        Re: the IS-A function JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-08-18 21:52 -0700
    Re: the IS-A function Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 07:11 -0700
    Re: the IS-A function franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 23:13 -0700
      Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 11:59 -0700
        Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 15:11 -0700
          Re: the IS-A function franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 23:14 -0700
            Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 01:01 -0700
              Re: the IS-A function franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 03:14 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 13:31 +0300
                Re: the IS-A function Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 03:39 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 06:49 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 14:55 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-19 14:57 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 10:29 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 20:35 +0300
                Re: the IS-A function Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 10:53 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 11:01 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 19:36 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 20:15 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 14:53 -0700
              Re: the IS-A function Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-19 08:28 -0500
                Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 19:30 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-20 22:20 -0500
                Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 20:50 -0700
                OOP (was: the IS-A function) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 07:21 +0300
                Re: the IS-A function Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 01:42 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 14:16 +0200
                Re: the IS-A function Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 11:08 -0700
                Re: the IS-A function Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 21:25 +0200
                Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 12:01 -0700
      Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 17:08 -0700
        Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 00:29 -0700
          Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-28 11:01 -0700
            Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-28 14:45 -0700
    Re: the IS-A function Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 02:22 -0700
      Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 12:02 -0700
      Re: the IS-A function hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 18:31 -0700

csiph-web