This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 120 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 120 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Takashi Kato scripsit:
> Implementations may choose like this but the SRFI doesn't specify how
> the tasks are executed.
I think for portability we need to say how it works. Given the use cases
you mention, how about this: tasks on a single timer run consecutively
(on a single thread), but different timers run concurrently (on separate
threads)? That way the behavior is more predictable for the user.
--
No saves, Antonio, loke es morirse en su lingua. Es komo kedarse soliko en el
silensyo kada dya ke Dyo da, komoser sikileoso sin saver porke.
--Marcel Cohen, 1985