Re: [Caml-list] Has the thread cancellation problem evolved ?

[skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net>]

On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 13:38 +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
> In the presence of a human user you
> > cannot let the ui hang for arbitrary long period of time, he should
> > be able to cancel if he gets bored.
> 
> Then write in CPS and weave an abortable continuation between each step.

But there's no assurance that will work: Felix uses a closely related
technique involving resumptions, but the compiler also optimises
almost every one of those 'steps' away.

Encoding regular checks is too hard; in that Daniel is right
the user shouldn't have to bother. However a compromise might be:
in most code, block async exceptions, at specified points,
do a check. In computationally intensive code not allocating resources, 
allow them anywhere and guard with a single trap.

Well .. this reminds me of the problem of scheduling parallel
processing .. skeletons and Ocaml3p come to mind here.

It seems in this model type system support is required: ideally
the 'guarded intensive calculation' would be a monad?

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net