[plt-dev] Parallel Futures Release

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Matthew Flatt <mflatt at cs.utah.edu> wrote:
>> > But I'm not sure why you would need a separate function for
>> > futures-count, unless you're intending it to be related to question
>> > (6) below?
>>
>> Not really -- I'm just thinking that people would want to know whether
>> futures are enabled, and `processor-count' is the way to do this now.
>> So if that always returns the number of cores, it's probably enough to
>> have a function that returns whether futures are available.
>
> This also doesn't make sense to me. When `(processor-count)' produces
> 1, it doesn't matter whether MzScheme was built with `--enable-futures'
> or not; the resulting lack of performance improvement is the same
> either way.

Well, someone might build a OS-processlevel thingy that depends on
this, and it might be useful for places, too.

(but I agree with your larger point)

Robby