Re: pfSync() and faster dynamics

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Jim Helman (jimh++at++surreal)
Sat, 30 Oct 93 16:42:11 -0700

Decoupling tasks to run at different rates is essential, but going
from 1:1 to 1:N and N:1 (synchronous) gets you a lot more than going
the next step to 1:X.X and X.X:1 (asynchronous).

Given most common languages, fully asynchronous systems are much
harder to debug (and harder to have confidence in) because of all
the possible run-time timing variations. They are also more prone
to problems of temporal aliasing as the frame udpate frequency beats
with the asynchronous thread's frequency. All this can be dealt
with, but why? I'm curious where Andy saw a big advantage for
complete asynchronicity.

rgds,

-jim helman

jimh++at++surreal.asd.sgi.com
415/390-1151

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:50:04 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.