On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 1:50 AM, roger peppe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Ryan Ingram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think what you want is possible if both sides are in STM. > > Other authors have posted solutions where one side or the other of the > > transaction is in I/O, but wholly inside STM it's not possible. > > Thanks, that's what I thought, although I wasn't sure of it, being > new to both Haskell and STM. > > Presumably this result means that it's not possible to implement > any bounded-buffer-type interface within (rather than on top of) STM. > > Isn't that a rather serious restriction? I don't know that it's practically-speaking that serious. One can write it in IO, using STM. I think of CSP as I/O anyway, but perhaps my thinking is flawed and dirty from MPI and Erlang "message passing" :-). Then again, I'm not sure why keeping it in STM is even valuable really. IO gets the job done right? > > > cheers, > rog. > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
