From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Tolpin <dvd@davidashen.net>
Message-Id: <200403020748.i227mLxn071341@adat.davidashen.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: advantages of limbo
In-Reply-To: <4cac3ee48455c3c5f48149771bba4f03@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R
Date: Tue,  2 Mar 2004 11:48:21 +0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0a52ef4c-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> Are you including all the plethora (eg. Thread) in the
> discussion? Have you considered how threads merge with
> synchronized?

Class Thread is not a part of the language. 'synchronized'
is. What's wrong with Java synchronization? Can you please
bring an example in Java and limbo where Java's synchronization
is bad while limbo's approach is right?

> BTW, for closures and polymorphism you'd use module pointers
> in Limbo; I forgot to reply to this earlier.

How exactly are closures  expressed with module pointers?
Can a module be created dynamically?

David Tolpin