Re: [Caml-list] Distributed computing libraries

[Vincent Aravantinos <vincent.aravantinos@gmail.com>]

On 06/06/2012 01:31 PM, oliver wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 12:53:07PM -0400, Thomas Braibant wrote:
>> Maybe it would be interesting for the community if someone could sum
>> up the pros and cons of each of this "libraries", and maybe give some
>> information about their status (still in development, mature, etc)?
> [...]
>
> Yes this would be fine.
> And maybe "someone" could also mean some people...
> ...maybe there are people out there, that now one or two of them well,
> and other of these libs not or not well.
>
> ...so that the information can be gathered by a lot of people.
>
> But it would be fine to have some criteria for classifying.
>
> For example:
>
>    - one / multicore
>    - local machine / distributed via net
>    - threads / processes
>    - just library calls, language extension, or seperate language
>    - toplevel-runtime / byte code / native-code
>    - necessity of code rewrite for local and remote/distributive stuff,
>       or possibility of transparent usage
- compatibility with commonly used libraries

-- 
Vincent Aravantinos
Postdoctoral Fellow, Concordia University, Hardware Verification Group
http://users.encs.concordia.ca/~vincent