I find that what-to before how-to admonition confusing when proposed by
folks promoting a how-to mechanism. Off hand, I'd presume that if you pick a
really good how-to, the clarity gained will help you get the what-to more
right. We don't get to make an argument all at once, we have to do it a
little bit at a time so anything that makes the current state more obvious
should help. No?

Richard

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:17 AM, John Zabroski <[email protected]>wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Michael Arnoldus <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ok - that makes sense. Good point.
>>
>> Would it be fair to say that we're really searching for is a formally
>> specified processor that makes the programmer as efficient as possible?
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
> We're searching for a way to solve orthogonal problems orthogonally.
>  Specification is completely separate from implementation.  The AUSTIN
> Protocol Compiler project [1] has a really good example of TCP/IP Networking
> stack as implemented in BSD 4.4 and presented in Wright and Stevens TCP/IP
> Illustrated Volume 2.  They argue that, if you look at the C language
> implementation:
>
> [...] important details handling intrinsic or extrinsic issues frequently
> comprise only a small fraction of the implementation, while these details
> require a great deal of research and constitute the largest part of the
> difficulties in protocol development.  For example, Nagle's algorithm[9],
> which adaptively inhibits small messages in TCP connections and thus helps
> to avoid network congestion collapse, requires approximately four lines of
> code in TCP/IP Illustrated's presentation.  Refinements to Nagle's
> algorithm, originally published in 1984, are still being suggested; for
> example, by Minshall, et al., in 1999 [10].
>
> The key to understanding and implementing any complex system with vital but
> miniscule details, particularly in such an ad-hoc environment, is
> modularization.  In case of network protocols, modularization almost always
> involves layering.
>
> Hopefully, if you're on this mailing list, you're familiar with Ian
> Piumarta's work on A Minimal Architecture for TCP/IP [2].  Unfortunately,
> Ian has not written a full technical report on this subject.  If he did, it
> would make sense to cite the Austin Protocol Compiler project, as it appears
> to be the most advanced project in terms of addressing orthogonal (TCP/IP)
> networking problems orthogonally.  In other words, using approaches to
> building operating systems other than just the layering approach describes
> by Dijkstra in The Structure of the 'THE'-multiprogramming System [3] and
> also the aspect-oriented approach by Kiczales [4], which is commonly
> confused by researchers and practitioners as being what Dijkstra meant by
> "the separation of concerns" [5], what Christopher Strachey meant by "*Figure
> out* what you want to *say* before you *figure out* how to *say* it" [6],
> and what Joseph Goguen ambitioned for OBJ and TATAMI, using such powerful
> ideas as inductionless induction as an example of "proof-by-consistency"
> [7].
>
>
> Informal list of references
> [1] http://books.google.com/books?id=P4vmo2Sdjg8C
> [2] A Tiny TCP/IP Using Non-deterministic Parsing,
> http://vpri.org/pdf/tr2007008_steps.pdf - Page 17
> [3]
> http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD01xx/EWD196.html
> [4] The Art of the Metaobject Protocol, by Gregor Kiczales, Jim des
> Rivieres and Daniel G. Bobrow.  1991.
> [5]
> http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD04xx/EWD447.html
> [6] Denotational Semantics: The Scott-Strachey Approach to Programming
> Language Theory, by Joseph Stoy. 1977.  See preface for quote.
> [7] "Tossing Algebraic Flowers Down the Great Divide."  Joseph Goguen.
>
> _______________________________________________
> fonc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>
>


-- 
Richard Karpinski, Nitpicker extraordinaire
148 Sequoia Circle,
Santa Rosa, CA 95401
Home: 707-546-6760
http://nitpicker.pbwiki.com/
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc

Reply via email to