C is the reason why Linux doesn't have concurrency.

>>59078304
I believe you.

At the same time, I don't care. Linux is shit.

>>59078313
Linux is shit because C is shit

>>59078304
Windows is superior because it has coroutines.

Partially, but in reality its because theres a few hunder distros instead of one or two. Gnu/ linux and gnu/ linux propietary should be the only commercial distros. Focus on maintaining basically one version, then make that version flexible as fuck. Of course some extra distros need to exsist for embedded systems, clusters, etc but if you can get it so the one distro is tailorable to shit and high end systems then of course it will be better and have more market share

>Linux doesn't have concurrency
beg pard

>>59078363
tell me more

>>59078370

Theres a c library for threading.

>>59078384
Oh that accidental add-on
sasuga, anon you really made my hopes high

linux has concurrency

>>59078391
Troll harder next time.

>>59078396
>>59078384
Linux doesn't have actual threads

>>59078391
a futex is like a mutex with a big, uncut, meaty dick

>>59078402
Elaborate.

yeah, that's why so many libraries were written in C to do concurrency anon, because C is just a huge bottleneck to concurrency xd

I wish Linux was Plan 9.

>>59078407
threads are processes in linux

>>59078439
XD

>>59078442
http://blog.codef00.com/2008/01/29/linuxs-ptrace-api-sucks/

>>59078439
(You)

>>59078439
It's rather that process are threads.
The distinction is funny in the linux world.

Maybe you should first properly define thread/process and then we can talk about whether linux has one or the other.

>>59078409
It actually is, since the compiler can barely do any aliasing detection so it can't decide to emmit parallel code on its own.

So C required some manual interaction to produce parallel code, which most other language (implementations) also require, because there's upper bounds to its usefulness.

>>59078439
I think you are misunderstanding something. The clone() call, that underlies forking and posix threads has a flags for setting your own private memory space or you sharing the parent one and just having another context of execution. If you think about it, process and threads are just incarnations of the same concept of context of execution. Linux in this case does the right thing and unified both of them in implementation.

So threads are not processes, they are context of execution with specific flags to the clone call. Process are also context of execution but with other specific flags for the clone call.

File: 1472246479273.jpg (24KB, 500x455px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x455px

C is the reason why mom had to cancel all my appointments to make time for me to fix xorg.conf.

wtf the other day someone told me everything in linux is a file!!!! wtf i hate linux now

>>59078515
someone lied to you because you're a gullible animu mentally ill kid

>>59078531
WTF???????? processes are THREADS???????

>>59078469
>process are threads
false

>>59078503
>>59078503
posix isnt linux

File: ywyrHntjPZw.jpg (25KB, 491x585px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 491x585px

>>59078439

>>59078553
You still failed to properly define anything.

And even if you find something, small reminder that processes are also kthreads.

Linux does have concurrency, that's why you can run processes concurrently.

"herp derp nuh uh because muh special definition of concurrency" --retard.

File: akka_full_color.png (13KB, 607x168px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 607x168px

>>59078304
Linux supports massive concurrency.

That said, in the user space, if you want concurrency, you're probably actually going with the JVM (Java, Scala, ...).

File: Untitled-1.jpg (44KB, 427x318px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 427x318px

what do you guys mean

bump for linux is shit