threads vs. async. (was oaf async activation)

[Darin Adler <darin eazel com>]

on 10/5/00 7:58 AM, Dan Winship at danw helixcode com wrote:

> Threads themselves aren't that broken, but gdb often doesn't cope with
> them well. We've gotten a lot of totally useless stack traces from
> people since we threaded evolution-mail (because they send a stack
> trace from the wrong thread). Also, the gnome-segv hack seems to lose
> in multi-threaded programs.

Yes. With gnome-vfs async. we get all those same problems, since the async.
implementation uses threads to do the work.

>> From what I have seen, async is even harder to work with (and
>> definitely harder to get right!) than threads
> 
> Wow. We came to exactly the opposite conclusion. :-/

Who compared the two to come to this opposite conclusion? We got our
conclusion mostly from the experiences of Pavel Cisler, who has worked on
two major file managers with many similar features, one with threads
(Tracker for BeOS) and one with an async. model (Nautilus for Gnome).

    -- Darin