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 QAA08919; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:42:41 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA10172 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:42:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from mg.ihep.su (mg.ihep.su [194.190.161.38]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id i0TFgdv06694 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:42:39 +0100 (MET) Received: by mg.ihep.su (Postfix, from userid 65436) id A15A2BC535; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:42:37 +0300 (MSK) Received: from mg.ihep.su (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mg.ihep.su (Postfix) with SMTP id 015AFBC535; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:42:36 +0300 (MSK) X-Mailbox-Line: From vsl@ontil.ihep.su Thu Jan 29 18:42:36 2004 Received: from ontil.ihep.su (ontil.ihep.su [194.190.161.63]) by mg.ihep.su (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F486BC3F0; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:42:36 +0300 (MSK) Received: by ontil.ihep.su (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 63F6EFC2C; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:42:36 +0300 (MSK) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ontil.ihep.su (Postfix) with ESMTP id 631389859; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:42:36 +0300 (MSK) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:42:36 +0300 (MSK) From: Vitaly Lugovsky To: Martin Berger Cc: The Trade Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml and concurrency In-Reply-To: <4018E282.2040404@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> Message-ID: References: <20040127063230.GA12482@inv_machine> <200401282326.i0SNQntl004612@bismarck-chet.watson.ibm.com> <97908806-5238-11D8-8975-000393B8133A@wetware.com> <4018E282.2040404@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.8 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,QL_SENT_FROM_MY_DOMAINS version=2.20 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; vitaly:01 lugovsky:01 ontil:01 ihep:01 caml-list:01 lacks:01 ocaml's:01 passing:01 liveness:01 expressive:01 orthogonal:01 passing:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 approaches:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Martin Berger wrote: > > 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, Nothing? Did you forget about the possibility to code without side effects? > 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. Right. But it's much easier to implement a quite stable environment for message passing, which will remain stable until you're following some quite simple rules. ------------------- 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