From: Richard Beton (rdb_at_email.domain.hidden)
Date: 1998-09-30 18:22:43
dyke wrote:
> I have now read the article. Synchronous C++ seems to have many
> features in common with CSP and the Java/CSP implementations - but
> there is no mention of either. A dining philosophers example is
> included.
>
> The author provides a web site:
>
> http://ltiwww.epfl.ch/sCxx
>
Are we to assume that there's some element of re-inventing wheels then? I
noticed the website refers to 'active objects' and 'synchronising
primitives', which is similar to the JavaPP workshop language of two years
ago. Having said that, it's good to hear that concurrency and formal
methods are being applied.
Some interesting questions arise: e.g.
what security (i.e. reliability) features are possible when compared
with CSP or occam? My guess, based on the C++ heritage, would be that none
is possible, but I'd like to invite other's views.
what performance issues arise? It's a multithreaded run-time kernel
running in a single Unix process. They're writing their own kernel.
I never quite understood the key differences between CSP and CCS. If
anyone can summarise concisely, I'd appreciate it.
regards,
Rick
-- Richard Beton B.Sc. C.Phys. M.Inst.P. Roke Manor Research Limited --------- Standard Disclaimer about my own views etc etc -------- --------- My mail client accepts rich text (HTML) mail -------- Welsh Highland Railway: http://www.whr.co.uk/WHR/WHR.html Java: In a world without Fences, who needs Gates?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 on 2004-10-31 20:03:56 GMT
© Copyright WoTUG
All rights reserved