On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:42 PM, William ML Leslie < [email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm intrigued by deep-immutability with easy deep COW semantics, that or > > STM. Something that enables the simplicity of immutability for > concurrency, > > and the ability to have efficient COW snapshots with roll-forward/back > (say > > for undo). Needs a way to construct cyclic immutable structures though. > > For my original intended usage of bitc, I would like to have mechanism > to implement this sort of thing, but not much in the way of policy. Right. That seems to fit with my view that I don't know how doG intended concurrency to be done. :-) The labeling thing is a compromise. *If* you label, you'll get checks on the constraints you express. That said, the compiler can't make you label, so you can be *ad hoc* if you need to.
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
