Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

Re: (OT) Programming languages for multicore computers

by creamygoodness (Curate)
on May 04, 2009 at 16:56 UTC ( #761767=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to (OT) Programming languages for multicore computers

Concurrency is a bug-spawning PITA. Managing access to shared resources is hard, and hard to test well. Any programming discipline which delegates responsibility for managing a large pool of shared objects to the user is a dead end.

The easiest way to achieve reliable concurrency is to minimize the number of shared resources. Using OS processes as your concurrency model achieves this without imposing any constraints on choice of programming language.

Unfortunately for those of us trying to write cross-platform compatible open source code, the menu of IPC techniques that work accross a wide breadth of operating systems is very limited. IMO, this is a problem which needs to be solved through OS innovation, not language innovation.

--
Marvin Humphrey
Rectangular Research ― http://www.rectangular.com
  • Comment on Re: (OT) Programming languages for multicore computers

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: (OT) Programming languages for multicore computers
by samtregar (Abbot) on May 04, 2009 at 17:58 UTC
    Does not compute. OS innovation != cross platform. Language innovation can help with cross platform coding if the language implementers are sufficiently clever. See, for example, Perl's fork() implementation on Windows. Not perfect, but better than anything MS is likely to give us in the next 10 years.

    I think Erlang is about as close to "OS innovation" as you're likely to see in this space. The Erlang runtime is practically a little OS unto itself with its own process model, networking, storage, etc.

    -sam

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://761767]
help
Chatterbox?
[Corion]: That is easy without having to pay for a house, a wife or children though. If I had any of these, or any two of these, the decision wouldn't be that easy.
[ambrus]: wait. I understand no wife and children, but how do you not have to pay for a house?
[hippo]: I had a low-paid job about 20 years ago and seriously considered going down to a 3-day week. Would have worked 60% of the time for about 80% of the cash.
[Corion]: ambrus: Well, I pay rent, but don't own a house with variable/ unforeseeable costs
[hippo]: The thesholds/benefits balance at the time was nuts.
[hippo]: But that doesn't last because, you know ... politicians. :(
[Corion]: hippo: Yeah, if you still get enough money to get by and don't have expensive hobbies or other fixed costs that can work out well
[ambrus]: ah good. I pay only rent too. but that still costs significant money.
[Corion]: ambrus: Yes, but that is already budgeted for

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others making s'mores by the fire in the courtyard of the Monastery: (13)
As of 2017-09-21 15:17 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    During the recent solar eclipse, I:









    Results (249 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?