From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04258BC0A for ; Wed, 23 May 2007 21:54:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from looneymail-a4.g.dreamhost.com (d071c805.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.5]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l4NJs33w004228 for ; Wed, 23 May 2007 21:54:04 +0200 Received: from [192.168.101.113] (unknown [66.84.219.53]) by looneymail-a4.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBFD3125EAE for ; Wed, 23 May 2007 12:54:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <46549BD9.3090505@SmokejumperIT.com> Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 14:54:01 -0500 From: Robert Fischer Organization: Smokejumper Consulting User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Teaching bottomline, part 3: what should improve. References: <1179871823.6966.78.camel@Blefuscu> <200705230039.29659.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20070523185428.GA32681@furbychan.cocan.org> <4654959C.7040701@fischerventure.com> <4654975F.5060108@janestcapital.com> In-Reply-To: <4654975F.5060108@janestcapital.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 46549BDB.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; haskell:01 denoting:01 parallelism:01 threads:01 erlang:01 haskell:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 concurrency:02 functional:02 functional:02 languages:03 languages:03 locks:03 Granted, although I haven't played with Haskell+STM: the point I was trying to make was that we need to be denoting parallelism instead of implementing it. To that end, functional languages are better for that kind of work (due to their disdain of side effects, if nothing else). Robert Fischer IT Firefighter Smokejumper Consulting Brian Hurt wrote: > Robert C Fischer wrote: > >> ...and locks and threads are not a viable long-term solution to the >> problem of concurrency in general. You're future-proofing enough by >> teaching them functional languages: Erlang and Cilk are closer to the >> needed future. >> > I think you mean "Haskell+STM" instead of Cilk. Cilk isn't a > particularly functional language (being effectively C plus a little bit). > > Brian > >