[racket] Efficiency of tight loops in Racket

Thanks for your reply.
What I am observing is that when running DrScheme without any other apps
running, only one processor is used at a time, although control often
swichtes bnetween the two processors. I also observe that windows 7 aborts
DrScheme when more than 2Gbyte of memory is being used. I have set the
memory limit of DrScheme to infite and for windows to about 5 Gbyte. Under
windows xp virtual memory did function well, but that was with 1 Gbyte of
memory and trashing made it impossible to go up to 2 Gbyte. Now I have two
cores of 2 Gbyte, but can't put my machine to thrash on page swapping.
Jos

> -----Original Message-----
> From: robby.findler at gmail.com 
> [mailto:robby.findler at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robby Findler
> Sent: 17 January 2011 16:14
> To: Noel Welsh
> Cc: Jos Koot; users at racket-lang.org
> Subject: Re: [racket] Efficiency of tight loops in Racket
> 
> I think the real reason is actually much sadder: no one on 
> the core team regularly uses windows. Well, until about a 
> month ago, when I started using windows for my development 
> tasks so hopefully that'll change.
> 
> But I'm not sure what Jos is observing and I was expecting a 
> reply from Kevin or Matthew on this -- places are still 
> pretty experimental.
> 
> Robby
> 
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Noel Welsh 
> <noelwelsh at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've seen lots of recent commits dealing w/ Windows 7 / 64-bit 
> > support, so I expect it is simply time. Windows is not as developer 
> > friendly as Unix so likely to receive new features last (as 
> a guess).
> >
> > N.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Jos Koot 
> <jos.koot at telefonica.net> wrote:
> >> Is there a specific reason why there is no parallel 
> support for place 
> >> on a dual core processor with Windows 7.
> >> Thanks, Jos
> > _________________________________________________
> >  For list-related administrative tasks:
> >  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
> >