[plt-dev] Re: [plt-scheme] Speed up check-syntax

From: Robby Findler (robby at eecs.northwestern.edu)
Date: Mon Nov 9 21:25:08 EST 2009

Futures are the parallel construct that James Swaine is working on.
Likely it won't be a good fit for this, but James is going to run some
tests to be sure.


On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Jon Rafkind <rafkind at cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> Eli Barzilay wrote:
>> On Nov  9, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>>> Low-priority callbacks, meanwhile, effectively have a higher
>>> priority than threads blocked on `system-idle-evt'. So, maybe it's
>>> good that syntax coloring uses callbacks, since that will give it a
>>> higher priority than loading cross-reference information.
>> That's what I was fantasizing on previously -- in terms of that
>> message, low priority callbacks and idle events make two levels.  (And
>> yes, the idle event as an "I really don't care when it runs, just move
>> it out of the way" is something that fits the xref loading well, but
>> not the colorer.)
>> BTW, one thing that I don't like about my code is that it first
>> sleeps, then waits for an idle event.  My first thought was that it
>> should wait for the system to be idle for some time before it kicks
>> in.  It's not possible to do this now, right?  (Modulo some ridiculous
>> busy-wait loop that keeps polling the event.)  Is it possible to add
>> something that will make it possible?
> I noticed there was some new `futures' code in src/mzscheme/future.c. Aren't
> futures exactly whats required here?
>> (In theory there's not much point in doing this if the time slices
>> that I'm using are smaller than what matters for human interaction,
>> but when resources like IO are involved, it might make things feel a
>> little less responsive.)
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev

Posted on the dev mailing list.