Re: ATCT vs. PicoThreads

["Serguei Mourachov" <address@hidden>]

Well, PicoThreads and Brakes (
http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/~tim/MOS/brakes.html)
use similar approach to capture/restore state of computation in the JVM.
It is based on bytecode instrumentation when injected code fragments access
and modify JVM stack.
Unfortunately, in many cases such operations are not safe from the bytecode
verifier point of view
and in newest JVMs it rejects classes instrumented this way.
ATCT uses completely different mechanism based on secondary bytecode
interpreter (written in Java)
that executes methods marked as "Continuations Enabled".
Actually ATCT uses serializable thread semantics instead of continuations as
well as Brakes do.
>From our experience this approach is more acceptable for typical programmer.

Serguei Mourachov

www.velare.com

Vadim Nasardinov wrote:
>
> To my admittedly untrained eye, Velare's Asynchronous Transfer of
> Control Threading (ATCT) looks remarkably similar to PicoThreads
> (http://www.google.com/search?q=PicoThreads).
>
>
>