On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 14:24 -0400, Mark Miller wrote: > Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 00:57 +0700, Constantine Plotnikov wrote: > > [...] it is possible to write multithreaded programs > >>using [C]. [...] > > > > It is true that people write these things in C. It is also true that > > these codes rely on behavior that is NOT part of the language > > specification. Each platform makes platform-specific extensions to > > compiler and runtime to support this. > > Yes. See Hans Boehm's "Threads Cannot be Implemented as a Library" > <http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-209.html>.
Can you expand on this? Which direction is your point supporting? > > We rejected direct support for concurrency in BitC for two reasons: > > > > 1. We have never seen a language concurrency model that we think was > > "done right." > > Ahem, cough cough, ah, over here, [gesticulates wildly while pointing], ... Respectfully, in my opinion, no. "E the system" has a concurrency model that I think is done right for many purposes (though I am skeptical about its relevance in something like a kernel). This is so precisely because "E the language" explicitly excludes any concurrency at all from the specification -- the goal being deterministic execution. What am I missing here? shap _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
