From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 50f4538c for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:07:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id C20F0A1B43; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:07:54 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D549DA181B; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:07:44 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 67A43A181B; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:07:43 +1000 (AEST) Received: from hacklheber.piermont.com (hacklheber.piermont.com [166.84.7.14]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4CB2A1563 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:07:42 +1000 (AEST) Received: from snark.cb.piermont.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hacklheber.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4648C11B; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:07:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from jabberwock.cb.piermont.com (jabberwock.cb.piermont.com [10.160.2.107]) by snark.cb.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC632DED83; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:07:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:07:42 -0400 From: "Perry E. Metzger" To: Larry McVoy Message-ID: <20180629150742.5d6cf508@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> In-Reply-To: <20180629180109.GC10867@mcvoy.com> References: <81277CC3-3C4A-49B8-8720-CFAD22BB28F8@bitblocks.com> <20180628141538.GB663@thunk.org> <20180628104329.754d2c19@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <20180628145609.GD21688@mcvoy.com> <20180628154246.3a1ce74a@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <20180628170317.14d65067@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <20180628222954.GD8521@thunk.org> <20180629001831.GA29490@mcvoy.com> <20180629114124.3529a1a8@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <20180629180109.GC10867@mcvoy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 legacy, C, and modern architectures X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 11:01:09 -0700 Larry McVoy wrote: > Well welcome to the old farts club, I'll cut you some slack :) > I still think you are missing the point I was trying to make, > it's amusing, a bit, that you are preaching what you are to me > as a guy who moved Sun in that direction. I'm not at all against > your arguments, I was just making a different point. I think we may be mostly talking past each other. To me, the underlying question began at the start of this thread (see the subject which we should have changed a long time ago): "is there any benefit to new sorts of programming languages to deal with the modern multiprocessor world". I think we're now at the point where dealing with fleets of processors is the norm, and on the languages side, I think Erlang was a good early exemplar on that, and now that we have Rust I think the answer is a definitive "yes". Go's CSP stuff is clearly also intended to address this. Having language support so you don't have to handle concurrent and parallel stuff all on your own is really nice. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger perry@piermont.com