Re: [fonc] Physics and Types

2011-08-04 Thread Simon Forman
Oh awesome! Thank you both. That's got to be one of the single most profound uses of computers I've ever run across. Warm regards, ~Simon On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Alan Kay wrote: > Here's the link to the paper > http://www.vpri.org/pdf/rn2005001_learning.pdf > Cheers, > Alan > >

Re: [fonc] Physics and Types

2011-08-04 Thread Alan Kay
Here's the link to the paper http://www.vpri.org/pdf/rn2005001_learning.pdf Cheers, Alan > >From: Martin McClure >To: Fundamentals of New Computing >Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 3:46 PM >Subject: Re: [fonc] Physics and Types > >On 08/03/2011 08:10 PM, Simo

Re: [fonc] Physics and Types

2011-08-04 Thread Martin McClure
On 08/03/2011 08:10 PM, Simon Forman wrote: On the other hand, there's a story (I believe it's in one of the VPRI documents but I couldn't locate it just now) about children using their machines to take pictures of a falling object and then analyzing the pictures and deducing for themselves the

Re: Thread Clarification (Re: [fonc] Physics and Types)

2011-08-04 Thread BGB
On 8/4/2011 1:35 PM, David Barbour wrote: On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:43 PM, BGB > wrote: it is a straightforward interpretation of scope: both lexical and dynamic scope cross code boundaries with no effects on their behavior. this makes an issue for "as

Re: Thread Clarification (Re: [fonc] Physics and Types)

2011-08-04 Thread David Barbour
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:43 PM, BGB wrote: > it is a straightforward interpretation of scope: > both lexical and dynamic scope cross code boundaries with no effects on > their behavior. > this makes an issue for "async { ... }", as the scope is retained across > thread boundaries. > > altering

Re: Thread Clarification (Re: [fonc] Physics and Types)

2011-08-04 Thread BGB
On 8/4/2011 7:55 AM, David Barbour wrote: On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:53 AM, BGB > wrote: if the parent thread sees its "thread-local" variable change when a child-thread assigns to it, this is a problem. it is a natural result though of the basic semantics.

Re: Thread Clarification (Re: [fonc] Physics and Types)

2011-08-04 Thread David Barbour
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:53 AM, BGB wrote: > > if the parent thread sees its "thread-local" variable change when a > child-thread assigns to it, this is a problem. it is a natural result > though of the basic semantics. > If a problem is a natural result of *your* language's semantics, then fix y

Re: Thread Clarification (Re: [fonc] Physics and Types)

2011-08-04 Thread BGB
On 8/4/2011 1:06 AM, David Barbour wrote: On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:10 AM, BGB > wrote: The new thread should inherit the entire dynamic scope - logically, a local copy thereof. If there are object references mixed in, then the new thread now

Re: Thread Clarification (Re: [fonc] Physics and Types)

2011-08-04 Thread David Barbour
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:10 AM, BGB wrote: > The new thread should inherit the entire dynamic scope - logically, a local >> copy thereof. If there are object references mixed in, then the new thread >> now has a copy of these references, but the reference variables initially >> point to shared o

Re: Thread Clarification (Re: [fonc] Physics and Types)

2011-08-04 Thread BGB
On 8/3/2011 9:43 PM, David Barbour wrote: On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:24 PM, BGB > wrote: If you have dynamic scope, you do not need TLS. some people could potentially get annoyed or complain about having to re-declare their thread-local dynamic vari