Re: Occam vs. monitor

From: phw (P.H.Welch_at_email.domain.hidden)
Date: 1998-05-27 18:58:30

• Next message: Adrian Lawrence: "Temporal logic and compositional reasoning."
• Previous message: Rick van Rein: "Pi-Calculus vs. CSP"
• Maybe in reply to: phw: "Re: Occam vs. monitor"
• Next in thread: Oyvind Teig: "Re: Occam vs. monitor"

Denis,

> > No! Erroneous channel usage certainly causes deadlock. That's the only
> > way deadlock occurs in occam systems. Example:
>
> Do you really mean this, Peter?

Sorry! I was assuming that the following are all equivalent:

  (1) STOP

  (2) IF
        FALSE
          SKIP

  (3) CHAN OF INT a:
      a ! 42

  (4) CHAN OF INT a, b:
      PAR
        SEQ
          a ! 42
          b ! 99
        INT x, y:
        SEQ
          b ? x
          a ? y

which they are according to occam's formal semantics. In that sense, items
(1) and (2) above are "Erroneous channel usage" ;-) ...

Peter.

• Next message: Adrian Lawrence: "Temporal logic and compositional reasoning."
• Previous message: Rick van Rein: "Pi-Calculus vs. CSP"
• Maybe in reply to: phw: "Re: Occam vs. monitor"
• Next in thread: Oyvind Teig: "Re: Occam vs. monitor"

Original text of this message