Hi Richard,
This adds a lot of clarity, thanks.
On 18 February 2011 00:27, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
> On 18/02/2011, at 3:55 AM, alex wrote:
>> Ian Bogost starts off by arguing that learning a programming language
>> shouldn't meet a curricular requirement for learning a natural
>> language. That
> It's fair enough not because of what a programming language
> *is* (or isn't) but what it can (or can't) *do*, and that
> is to exchange ordinary human thoughts with other people.
It is just one function of a programming language to compile and
execute it on a machine. Another function is that a
Folks,
There have been tasks looking at using different techniques for concurrent
and parallel programming.
I posted one example to the Lambda the Ultimate front page a few months
ago. Please see "Is Transactional Programming Actually Easier?":
http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/4070
Something
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
> Prompted by various discussions elsewhere, I am on the search for recent
> experimental results and/or people doing or about to do experiments.
> The questions all relate to the models of parallel software:
> shared-memory multithreading, Ac
Sorry to the group if that last e-mail came off as rant'ish.
I think some focus on studies would be nice, but why does it feel like (to
me) that we are aimlessly picking "this versus that" studies?
I would start instead by using expert knowledge, and work from there. For
example, parallelism exp
