From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [9fans] OT: small xml parser found! From: John Murdie To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Cc: john@cs.york.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <248d9a3cc4f22adfa06745d136b1165d@vitanuova.com> References: <248d9a3cc4f22adfa06745d136b1165d@vitanuova.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1077207851.2590.25.camel@pc118> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:24:11 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: eec945a0-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Thu, 2004-02-19 at 16:14, C H Forsyth wrote: > >>USENIX 1996 by John Ousterhout offers an opposing view [of `threads'] > > only by ignoring nearly all the work on developing and > reasoning about concurrent systems done since (say) 1970! > but then that's not atypical of quite a bit of `modern' programming Yes, indeed - that's what I thought. The very phrase "event-driven programming" to describe programs written with callbacks annoys me; why can't people be honest and say "interrupt-handler programming"? Programs written e.g. with the CSP formalism "handle" events just as much as those written with interrupt handlers do! John A. Murdie Department of Computer Science University of York