I am not that convinced after a decade of programming concurrent applications (and being the main implementor of Oz and its libraries). Anything that matters to the interface of a software artifact in general is worth to be explicated. Dataflow variables (variables used in that sense) tend to end up on the interface side: here an explicit statement would be useful (IMHO). If you are not forced to explicate you are not forced to understand what you are doing.
I hate to disagree in principle. Yes, we designed Oz and the design is reasonably consistent. Today, I tend to make everything *explicit* (for the reason you yourself explicated on). We have invented Oz but not truth. Christian -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Van Roy Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 10:04 PM To: Peter Van Roy Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mozart Users Subject: Re: Suspend synchronously or asynchronously? Peter Van Roy wrote: > I don't think so. Just the opposite: *not* explicitly waiting on > dataflow variables is > actually the more complicated thing, so *that's* what should be > explicit. Keeping Sorry, what I mean is 'explicitly waiting on dataflow variables' is the more complicated thing. Peter ____________________________________________________________________________ _____ mozart-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-users _________________________________________________________________________________ mozart-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-users
