From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jan 3 9:56:37 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from luna.lyris.net (luna.shelby.com [207.90.155.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A25D15069 for ; Mon, 3 Jan 2000 09:56:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kip@lyris.com) Received: from luna.shelby.com by luna.lyris.net (8.9.1b+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id JAA05919; Mon, 3 Jan 2000 09:56:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from (luna.shelby.com [207.90.155.6]) by luna.shelby.com with SMTP (MailShield v1.50); Mon, 03 Jan 2000 09:56:01 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000 09:56:01 -0800 (PST) From: Kip Macy To: Martin Cracauer Cc: Steffen Merkel , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Limited amount of variables in a multithreaded programm? In-Reply-To: <20000103184233.B17710@cons.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SMTP-HELO: luna X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: kip@lyris.com X-SMTP-RCPT-TO: cracauer@cons.org,d_f0rce@gmx.de,freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: luna.shelby.com [207.90.155.6] Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > FreeBSD's ping(8) is not a program that should be used for teaching C > coding, threaded or not :-) I am inclined to agree. Programs that could cause DOS attacks are not a good way to start one's education. My point was merely that the problem was not insurmountable without raising the threads' stack size. Unless you know a priori how many threads you are going to have, changing the threads' stack size is dangerous. And yes, threads leave a lot to be desired as a programming model. I agree with Osterhout that the event model is the best way to go for most things for which threads are used. -Kip To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message