From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS4713 221.184.0.0/13 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (neon.ruby-lang.org [221.186.184.75]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F801F404 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 21:51:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from neon.ruby-lang.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A5F6120B1C; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:51:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from dcvr.yhbt.net (dcvr.yhbt.net [64.71.152.64]) by neon.ruby-lang.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D8BE120B1A for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:51:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A961F404; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 21:51:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 21:51:13 +0000 From: Eric Wong To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Message-ID: <20180124215113.GA29994@starla> References: <20180123173133.GB14355@starla> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180123173133.GB14355@starla> X-ML-Name: ruby-core X-Mail-Count: 85081 Subject: [ruby-core:85081] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618][Assigned] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid X-BeenThere: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ruby developers List-Id: Ruby developers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ruby-core-bounces@ruby-lang.org Sender: "ruby-core" Eric Wong wrote: > hsbt@ruby-lang.org wrote: > > - Name this "Thread", or something Thread-ish word than Fiber-ish > > So if we just use "Thread", then existing Thread becomes M:N? > I will think about that... I have many use cases for native > threads, too; but maybe they can be satisfied transparently. Thinking about this even more; I don't think it's possible to preserve round-robin recv_io/accept behavior I want from blocking on native threads when sharing descriptors between multiple processes. So a new class it is... > > - Matz doesn't have a strong opinion on the name but prefers 2 words (auto-fiber) than a coined word "Thriber." > > > > Next actions: > > > > * Give a thread-ish name > > OK, naming is hard :< > > LightThread? Maybe too long... > > Threadlet? OK, I am liking "threadlet", and it looks like a real word: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/threadlet ": a small thread : a delicate filament" > > * Lock and queue should work with auto-fiber? > > I can definitely make Queues work. I think ko1 was mildly > against increasing use of Mutex. How about we use Threadlet to discourage things we don't like about normal Threads (such as Mutex, ConditionVariable, ...). > One safety feature I was thinking about was disabling > auto-switching of Fibers while a Mutex is locked, even. s/Fibers/Threadlets/; but yes, I think it should be possible to have something like Threadlet.exclusive { ... } to prevent auto-switch surprises (like Thread.exclusive in 1.8)