Steven, thanks for your response. I'm only going to touch on part of it.


>What I see as the most likely way to achieve some benefit is to have
>worker threads partition the instances of an instrument.  

OK, let's take that as the starting point.

>I would say
>this is the best place to start and what we should aim for first as it
>is the easiest to achieve and still preserves all processing order of
>single-threaded csound.  This is the approach taken in the work I
>committed and is in CVS, and even then it reveals that there is a lot
>of work required to handle concurrency in even this relatively simple
>approach.  I would say if we do this first, we would get to focus on
>all of the essential changes required for concurrency (in other words,
>this work is foundation work we need to do no matter what the eventual
>strategy is used).

Can you outline your general approach?

How close is what you have done to working? What more needs to be done?

Regards,
Mike




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net