From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2369DBC69 for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 10:30:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.244]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l4U8UBGi021554 for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 10:30:11 +0200 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c24so662012ana for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 01:30:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=DamvASJtOHb6M70NWbYFk2LHUw9iHaSCeWEPQ0wijJQtdOC2evPdU2AlCefSj75JuMDzN4/S4syHxRt9/nHLqCnhKQOvbhD6jCtS9F6/AcDhCW0DjvO7fqK/EYHvJl8mlFm8OSONYGug2BB9Ts+2dLtkiQU8aEQL5HCnMGxZhFQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=HWYnrlN1T7PfSrKUxb1J0EW+Slkp3m0nQBBwHcvvvQkcwjSitD3VU6kDHCKPmghVL6pQHexpAdVCEwJLX/bvMH0c+Q71RIiqNijFGorJQ7NDFbG3wg4+7WZQ+VVgFH1Xspj0Ew4Uu3BO4hRoMSxeeWlrbz6TXTtOkbXHSZrmNUY= Received: by 10.100.95.19 with SMTP id s19mr5769410anb.1180513810398; Wed, 30 May 2007 01:30:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.168.16 with HTTP; Wed, 30 May 2007 01:30:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6f9f8f4a0705300130h3a536fb4hc6792afd61ee943b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 10:30:10 +0200 From: "Loup Vaillant" To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Faking concurrency using Unix forks and pipes In-Reply-To: <20070530181300.d4179bca.mle+ocaml@mega-nerd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200705300442.59906.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20070530070229.GB334@first.in-berlin.de> <6f9f8f4a0705300034g37006497t55f30e8ca3f3f191@mail.gmail.com> <200705300902.06760.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20070530181300.d4179bca.mle+ocaml@mega-nerd.com> X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 465D3613.000 on concorde : j-chkmail score : X : 0/20 1 0.000 -> 1 X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 465D3613.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; forks:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 developement:01 beginner's:01 bug:01 suck:98 vacuum:98 unix:01 beginners:01 wrote:01 experimental:01 caml-list:01 caml-list:01 bin:01 2007/5/30, Erik de Castro Lopo : > Jon Harrop wrote: > > > I'm having a look at it now. I had thought that it was an experimental version > > of OCaml that with a concurrent GC but that seems to be completely wrong. > > > > Will OCaml have a concurrent GC in the future? > > How much does a concurrent GC actually buy in comparison to > multiple processes each with their own GC and a robust way > of passing data between processes? > As far as I know, the developement team had made it quite clear that there will be no concurent GC (not in the near future, at least). > Erik > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Erik de Castro Lopo > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the > day they start making vacuum cleaners." -- Ernst Jan Plugge > > _______________________________________________ > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management: > http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list > Archives: http://caml.inria.fr > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs >