[racket] Efficiency of tight loops in Racket

I did try futures, but did not observe two processors being used
simultaneously.
Jos 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: robby.findler at gmail.com 
> [mailto:robby.findler at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robby Findler
> Sent: 17 January 2011 20:22
> To: Jos Koot
> Cc: Noel Welsh; users at racket-lang.org
> Subject: Re: [racket] Efficiency of tight loops in Racket
> 
> Oh, yes. DrRacket does not try to use two processors for 
> anything (unless your program uses futures or places, of course).
> 
> Robby
> 
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Jos Koot 
> <jos.koot at telefonica.net> wrote:
> > 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
> >> >
> >
> >