Re: Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- From: Matthew D Swank <akopa-is-very-much-like-my-mail-address@xxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 17:34:20 -0500
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:11:19 -0400, George Neuner wrote:
Most shared memory, multi-CPU OSes have symmetric multitasking which,....
by default, schedule threads across all CPUs
multi-core machines are here to stay so Lisp vendors
had better make peace with that.
How did connection machine lisp handle similar issues (or are the
differences too much to make illuminating comparisons)?
Matt
--
"You do not really understand something unless you can
explain it to your grandmother." — Albert Einstein.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- From: George Neuner
- Re: Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- References:
- Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- From: Vagif Verdi
- Re: Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- From: Bill Atkins
- Re: Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- From: George Neuner
- Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- Prev by Date: [Newbie wonder] SBCL and programming Linux
- Next by Date: Re: [Newbie wonder] SBCL and programming Linux
- Previous by thread: Re: Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- Next by thread: Re: Comparison of Lispworks and Allegro CL
- Index(es):