Concurrency

[Ross Paterson]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 01:15:03PM -0800, John Meacham wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 04:21:26PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
> > Great.  Apart from my misgivings about allowing cooperative scheduling
> > at all, here's a few comments on the proposal:
> 
> much much preferable to a standard that not everyone can implement. :)

Are there potential users for the compromise interface?  I had the
impressions that those wanting concurrency needed the fairness
guarantees.