[erlisp-devel] Erlisp and uptick

[Dirk Gerrits]

Faré wrote:
> Relevant discussion on the uptick blog:
> http://wagerlabs.com/uptick/2005/07/very-frustrating-saturday.html
> The author has rival concerns about speed and memory-efficiency of threads.
> 
> My take:
> 
> The idea is that there should be a standard API, and then multiple
> ways of implementing it. Providing a light-weight implementation in
> terms of green threads (Eric Lavigne just ported erlisp to cmucl), or
> of a continuation passing transform (Screamer style), are definitely
> implementation strategies for Erlisp.
> And if all goes well, we can mix and match implementation strategies
> within a same Erlisp universe: gimme slower memory-efficient threads
> for this, faster memory-wasting threads for that, migratable
> (Tube-like) threads for that other thing, etc.

That has been my take all along!  And the code to do this is already 
there.  (That is, there is a PROCESS class with THREADED-PROCESS as a 
subclass and more subclasses planned.)

Guys like Joel make me wonder if people actually read the Erlisp roadmap 
[0].  Is it too fluffy?  Not clear enough?  Too long?  Not structured 
properly?  I'm willing to rewrite it if that can prevent things like 
these...

- Dirk

[0] http://dirkgerrits.com/programming/erlisp/roadmap/