From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA22559; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:38:27 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA21830 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:38:26 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.dcs.qmul.ac.uk (vicar.dcs.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.88.163]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id i0TAcPP16025 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:38:26 +0100 (MET) Received: from xenografia.plus.com ([212.159.85.26] helo=dcs.qmul.ac.uk) by mail.dcs.qmul.ac.uk with asmtp (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.30) id 1Am9Z3-0007Jd-Ax; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:38:25 +0000 Message-ID: <4018E282.2040404@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:37:54 +0000 From: Martin Berger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031114 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vitaly Lugovsky CC: The Trade Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml and concurrency References: <20040127063230.GA12482@inv_machine> <200401282326.i0SNQntl004612@bismarck-chet.watson.ibm.com> <97908806-5238-11D8-8975-000393B8133A@wetware.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Auth-User: martinb X-clamav-result: clean (1Am9Z3-0007Jd-Ax) X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 lacks:01 ocaml's:01 passing:01 liveness:01 expressive:01 orthogonal:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 approaches:01 essentially:02 library:03 types:03 implement:05 queue:05 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > You may want to try my mpassing library, which now lacks the > sequental orthodox unixish message queue, but it would be easy to > implement (going to do it soon). I'm using it heavily in a > distributed calculations as well as in a massive agent models and > as a simple way to program "components", and I'm quite happy I > don't ever met in OCaml any of the most common concurrncy bugs > I enjoyed with Java and C++. i wonder why. ocaml essentially offers the same approaches to concurrency as do the relevant java or C/C++ libraries. as far as i can see, there's nothing in Ocaml's approach to shared memory concurrency that would prevent deadlocks or lack of mutual exclusion, and there's nothing that prevents the usual problems with message passing, like lack of liveness. you do have more expressive types in Ocaml, but that is orthogonal to concurrency. martin ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners