Re: [Algorithms] General purpose task parallel threading approach

[Mat N. <mat...@bu...>]

I can describe one I've worked with. But it has the distinct advantage of also allowing for inspection so that you can beat it into something more special purpose.

MSN
From: Gregory Junker [mailto:gj...@da...]
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 8:29 AM
To: 'Game Development Algorithms'
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] General purpose task parallel threading approach

"People write general systems all the time"

Oh? Describe one.

You continue to allude to this mythical "general system" - give us an example of what you consider a "general system" that people write all the time.

Greg


________________________________
From: Sebastian Sylvan [mailto:seb...@gm...]
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 12:12 AM
To: Game Development Algorithms
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] General purpose task parallel threading approach


On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Gregory Junker <gj...@da...<mailto:gj...@da...>> wrote:

Sebastian



First, what attitude?

You can't be serious.




Second, the components you write are *not* as general as possible - that would create a useless system, as I (and others) have already pointed out. You write components that are coded to do something specific, and because they are restricted to doing something specific, when you need something that does that specific something in the future, you can reuse that component. That is what "reuse" means.



You should know this, yet you continue to harp on this "general" theme anytime anyone tries to explain to you what should be obvious about your use of this term. One can only assume, from your responses and your behavior in this topic, that you are simply being argumentative at this point.

Who's being argumentative now? You're arguing that my point about a certain system lacking generality/flexibility is pointless because if you take generality to the absurd extreme you wouldn't get a useful system. When have I ever said you should do that?

People write general systems all the time, criticizing a specific technique for being restrictive is perfectly legitimate.

Again, I'm *using* this very system right now, clearly I'm perfectly happy to make compromises on generality. If you want to argue, please do it with me, rather than some straw man you've conjured up out of thin air.


--
Sebastian Sylvan
+44(0)7857-300802
UIN: 44640862