3 ms·
Oh, to return to what life was like 23 years ago, when GUI applications were so simple that you could get away with fitting all their work onto a single thread.
by bunderbunder 8y ago
Oh, to return to what life was like 23 years ago, when GUI applications were so simple that you could get away with fitting all their work onto a single thread.
Nowadays, a great many GUI apps have a lot of data crunching to do in the background. You've really got two options for how to handle that:
1. Be intermittently unresponsive, like iTunes.
2. Do work on a background thread, like decent software.
(Intentionally omitting the option of breaking your work into a bunch of tiny bits that can be handled on a single thread's event queue like some sort of deranged node.js app from hell, on the grounds that please no I can't even.)
- pjmlp 8y ago3. Work on a task handled by a thread pool, like scalable software 4. Work on another process, like safe software
- acdha 8y agoEven 20 years ago single threading was well known to be inadequate – anyone doing file or network I/O got daily reminders of how bad that was as the UI wedged, not to mention MacOS where holding a menu open froze an app. Windows NT, OS/2, and BeOS were better, if only the hardware cost cane down and we could ditch this legacy DOS/Win16 code…