This paper looks very interesting and promises some good ideas. It also looks like it will require time and effort to digest.
I've only read the first few pages, but one thing that does leap out is at the beginning of section 3, they say: "... a purely-declarative language is a perfect setting for transactional memory." What's not clear to me from this is whether STM will work in a non-declarative language like Python. Thursday, September 29, 2005, 8:12:23 AM, Michael Hudson wrote: > Bruce Eckel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I'd like to restart this discussion; I didn't mean to put forth active >> objects as "the" solution, only that it seems to be one of the better, >> more OO solutions that I've seen so far. >> >> What I'd really like to figure out is the "pythonic" solution for >> concurrency. Guido and I got as far as agreeing that it wasn't >> threads. >> >> Here are my own criteria for what such a solution would look like: > Just because I've been mentioning it everywhere else since I read it, > have you seen this paper: > http://research.microsoft.com/Users/simonpj/papers/stm/ > ? I don't know how applicable it would be to Python but it's well > worth the time it takes to read. > Cheers, > mwh Bruce Eckel http://www.BruceEckel.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Contains electronic books: "Thinking in Java 3e" & "Thinking in C++ 2e" Web log: http://www.artima.com/weblogs/index.jsp?blogger=beckel Subscribe to my newsletter: http://www.mindview.net/Newsletter My schedule can be found at: http://www.mindview.net/Calendar _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
