Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
Where's my non-classical shared memory concurrency technology?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Berke Durak <berke.durak@g...>
Subject: Where's my non-classical shared memory concurrency technology?
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:03 AM, Jon Harrop <> wrote:

> Avoiding threads does not improve the safety of the language, it simply
> degrades the capabilities of the language.

Avoiding threads is like avoiding malloc() in a C program and doing only
static and stack allocation: it is cumbersome and impractical, but avoids a
whole class of allocation bugs.

Similarly, avoiding threads removes concurrency bugs - while reducing the
concurrency capabilities.  So it's not really improvement of safety, but
rather avoidance of unsafety - a purely semantic issue.

I think we are still lacking programming language technology to integrate
safe and easy-to-use shared memory concurrency in ML-like languages.  Does
anyone know of anything in this area aside from transactional memory?