Re: task msging
- Posted by useless Sep 16, 2009
- 1670 views
The way that task yielding works. Go back and re-read what I wrote. Especially the ball analogy. You admitted that your description, while it describes how multitasking works under a specific set of circumstances (which you only specified when you gave the example with the sequence of task numbers executed), does not accurately describe how multitasking works.
Well, the specific set of circumstances i optomise to result in greater speed, distributed over the tasks in such a way that it doesn't always work like you say it does. Why are you fighting this?
Yes, I agree, that in that circumstance, that's how it behaves. That was not the context of your previous statements. Why is this difficult to understand?
It's not at all difficult to understand. I don't know why you think i cannot understand that. What i don't feel like doing is discuss ANY thing with you. You're the one who could not fathom the meaning of "to", why should i bother telling you how http.e can be made to crash, or give you the code to fix it? Why give you any context AT ALL, seeing as how this is how talking to you goes on. This conversation went on far too long on the devlist, and now it's here. You ran me off the devlist, i can only assume you mean to do the same here. There's nothing for us to discuss, yet every time you post, you haveto say that i don't understand something, or i don't work well with people who prefer to pick me apart than get on with the coding.
We can't read your mind. You were making general statements, while apparently only meaning them to apply to some set of circumstances that only you knew about at the time.
We never got past what "to" meant, and your incessant pasting from the source code and docs. We never got to the context. We never got to anything useful. The statements were not general to my programming style, they were specific. It was you who took off on tangents and generalised them. To make sure that doesn't happen, you may have noticed the task manager code isn't on my site any more, neither is the http.e fixes, or news4.ex or news5.ex.
Like I said before, when engaging in this sort of discussion, you need to be able to see beyond your code, or any particular example. At a minimum, you need to make sure that the participants are aware of the context.
I certainly didn't write news.ex. I wasn't even aware of it until there was a bug report filed about it crashing on linux (reported a week or two before you started working on it, IIRC), and then you enhanced the http library to be non-blocking. That was good work. However, that doesn't have any real bearing on the issue at hand here, which is how multitasking operates.
I do not think that is the issue at hand. I think the issue is that you cannot leave me alone. You must dispute me at every turn, and find ways to "prove" you are correct in the face of a different reality.
No, I dispute you where I believe that you are in error. I'm happy to be shown where I'm wrong. It's happened many times. This has nothing to do with you personally, as far as I'm concerned. It's simply about correcting statements that were made on a public forum--not to mention your continuing references to me and to the past discussion.
Matt
Hey Matt, you are WRONG. And i never learn from those i have no respect in. So you can give it up. You know how i can get you to post to a thread? I post first.
useless
