# Need for threads **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [February 21, 2006, 7:00pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/need-for-threads/54053 "2006-02-21T19:00:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tony_summerfelt)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2006, 7:00pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/need-for-threads/54053/1 "2006-02-21T19:00:40Z")
a discussion of tcl threads came up in that newsgroup. one of the posts stopped me cold. the msg boiled down to: on a single non-ht cpu if your program can’t do soemthnig while waiting on a resource there’s no real need for threaded code. threading will actually slow down your program overall. [http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1](http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1) telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org ---
**Author:** ![tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tony_summerfelt)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2006, 7:12pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/need-for-threads/54053/2 "2006-02-21T19:12:52Z")
Uh, yeah, that’s pretty much why not all code is threaded. On the other hand, in programs above a certain size, or ones that have graphical user interface, there usually is something else that you can do while you’re waiting on that resource. ---
**Author:** ![tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tony_summerfelt)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2006, 7:09pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/need-for-threads/54053/3 "2006-02-21T19:09:49Z")
On 2/21/06, tony summerfelt [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org This is accurate, of course threads _may_ simplify your design, which is a virtue as well. pth ---
**Author:** ![tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tony_summerfelt)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2006, 1:27am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/need-for-threads/54053/4 "2006-02-22T01:27:44Z")
DÅ?a Utorok 21 Február 2006 19:10 Daniel N. napísal: > Uh, yeah, that’s pretty much why not all code is threaded. > > On the other hand, in programs above a certain size, or ones that have > graphical user interface, there usually is something else that you can > do while you’re waiting on that resource. This is pretty much one of the few good reasons to use threads on a single-core processor - to keep an interactive user interface responsive. And to give people that can’t wrap their heads around parallel processing headaches making them code Dining Philosophers _mutter_ They also make life simpler in some scenarios - it’s definately easier to make a multithreaded application with parallel asynchronous input (think packet sniffing on multiple network interfaces) by hogging each with a thread you couldn’t care less about if it blocks, than using standard asynchronous IO, which isn’t even available for all input sources. David V. ---
**Author:** ![tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tony_summerfelt)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2006, 1:39pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/need-for-threads/54053/5 "2006-02-22T13:39:04Z")
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 03:09:22 +0900, you wrote: > This is accurate, of course threads _may_ simplify your design, which > is a virtue as well. that’s what i find. threading helps keep track of things that should be happening at the same time. and who knows, maybe i’ll have a multi-cpu in the future 🙂 [http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1](http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1) telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org ---
**Author:** ![tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@tony\_summerfelt](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tony_summerfelt)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2006, 1:51pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/need-for-threads/54053/6 "2006-02-22T13:51:30Z")
Daniel N. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Uh, yeah, that’s pretty much why not all code is threaded. > > On the other hand, in programs above a certain size, or ones that have > graphical user interface, there usually is something else that you can > do while you’re waiting on that resource. Like reading from or writing to another resource. Exactly. Ruby’s multithreading is only at a loss on a multi CPU machine with heavy computation because it doesn’t use more than one CPU. Kind regards ``` robert ```