From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091016172113.GC3135@nipl.net> References: <3e1162e60910150807w52ff067eq533e4cbd7493fee0@mail.gmail.com> <20091016172113.GC3135@nipl.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:39:05 -0700 Message-ID: <1fc0d9800910161639v484beb7mb17ccc410ddceb8@mail.gmail.com> From: Nick LaForge To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] Barrelfish Topicbox-Message-UUID: 88d1248a-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > maybe the Ken quote is false too - hard to believe he's that out of touch The whole table was ganging up on Roman and his crazy idea, I believe ;). The objection mostly was to Intel dumping the complexity of another core on the programmer after it ran out of steam in containing parallelism within the pipeline. Even though Inferno / CSP / Erlang / etc. type people were clearly anxious to make use of parallelism at the level of multiple processor cores, I don't think the average Java programmer was. (That's not to say that Java programmers hadn't been asking for a rude awakening. Perhaps someday, they will also learn what 'Object-Oriented' programming is. =E2=98=BA) Nick