In article <1251993672.16936.4779.ca...@work.sfbay.sun.com>, Roman V Shaposhnik <r...@sun.com> wrote: >On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 08:44 -0700, David Leimbach wrote: > >> The blocks aren't interesting at all by themselves, I totally agree >> with that. However what they do to let you write a function inline, >> that can be pushed to another function, to be executed on a concurrent >> FIFO, is where the real power comes out. >> >> >> I'm not 100% sure why the heck they did it this way, which is totally >> different from any other version of concurrent programming setup I've >> seen, except maybe that Apple likes to "think different"? > >It seems that quite a few concurrency frameworks worth the paper their >APIs are written on, are converging on this model. The ultimate goal >has to do with encapsulation of the computation into idempotent units >and describing the topology between those units. That separates the >executor from the semantics of computations nicely and has all sorts of >bonuses as far as bridging the gap between SMP and distributes systems >are concerned. > >I think the semantics of what needs to be done is well understood. The >million dollar question is how to best express such a semantics in what >still looks like a programming language. > >What Apple has done is one way of attacking the problem. Where I sit we >explore CPS for doing very similar sort of thing. One point is clear -- >there no consensus yet.
I don't think I follow what you just said, but your conclusion is probably exactly right. -- Greg Comeau / 4.3.10.1 with C++0xisms now in beta! Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90. Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?
