Re: [9fans] current state of thread programming

["Paweł Lasek" <pawel.lasek@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 13:50, Roman V. Shaposhnik <rvs@sun.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 13:35 +0200, tlaronde@polynum.com wrote:
>> The most efficient is to have tools that match the way our brains work
>> (or not...). I'm not convinced our brains are "parallel" (at least mines
>> are not).
>
> I disagree on philosophical grounds ;-) It's been one of the major
> engineering follies to always approach design from a "just follow
> the nature" standpoint. No wonder that before the Wright brothers
> everybody thought the best way to fly is to flap some kind of wings.

I'd disagree with this example, as it is certainly not a viable one.
First, the main thing that Wright brothers have created were control
surfaces and a lighweight plane - people had been flying for few years
before them, but nobody could get a light enough engine :)

And flapping wings wasn't an error - the error was how it was
implemented. And if you take a good look at bigger birds, you'll see
that in their case, flapping is a reuse of equipment - the principles
of flight are the same.

Oh, and BTW, there's a lot of development for ornitopters. Da Vinci
simply didn't have the tools (of which one of the most important is
computer. With _lots_ of computing power...)

> P.S. I guess, we are getting way off topic here.
>
Sorry for continuing with OT.


-- 
Paweł Lasek