Article View: comp.sys.powerpc
Article #3605Re: Debate: PowerMac "trounces" Pentium....???
From: Anthony D. Tribelli
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:44
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:44
34 lines
2192 bytes
2192 bytes
David K. Every (dke@adnc.com) wrote: : adt@netcom.com (Anthony D. Tribelli) wrote: : > : Hmmm. I don't think PMT is actually required for threaded apps ... : > : > It's not required, but it's easier to build threaded apps with PMT and PMT : > can help improve system responsiveness. CMT can work when the application : > is written with extra care, but it's cludgey code. : BZZT! WRONG! : There is no difference in CREATING the programs... Sorry, I disagree, and I believe you contradict yourself later. : So the only issue where PMT is better is that without it you can hog too : much time a little easier, or you can prevent others from getting their : slice of time ... Which is why I believe CMT applications require extra care when written, i.e. they are created (written) differently than a PMT application (the contradiction to your earlier "no difference" statement). A threaded CMT application needs a little more care to ensure that some interaction between threads does not cause the app to hog the CPU. I suppose your statement that there is "no difference" could be considered true if an application makes no effort to cooperate with others and hogs the CPU. However I was assuming that the discussion was about "well behaved" apps. Tony -- ------------------ Tony Tribelli adtribelli@acm.org
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<adtDpntEF.Epw@netcom.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!netcom.com!adtReferences:
<4jj4mj$jnk@nntpb.cb.att.com> <danpop.828822597@rscernix> <3167FCAA.101@mts.se> <31680215.403E@mts.se> <4kdvbi$77c@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> <adtDpLvI2.H3u@netcom.com> <dke-1004960729580001@adnline44.adnc.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.powerpc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.intel Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!netcom.com!adt From: adt@netcom.com (Anthony D. Tribelli) Subject: Re: Debate: PowerMac "trounces" Pentium....??? Message-ID: <adtDpntEF.Epw@netcom.com> Followup-To: comp.sys.powerpc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.intel Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] References: <4jj4mj$jnk@nntpb.cb.att.com> <danpop.828822597@rscernix> <3167FCAA.101@mts.se> <31680215.403E@mts.se> <4kdvbi$77c@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> <adtDpLvI2.H3u@netcom.com> <dke-1004960729580001@adnline44.adnc.com> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:44:39 GMT Sender: adt@netcom.netcom.com