On Feb 17, 2008 9:57 PM, Nicholas Nethercote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > +to and reading from the shared memory. Since the invention of the > > +multithreading concept, there is an ongoing debate about which way to > > +model concurrent activities is better -- shared memory programming or > > +message passing [Ousterhout 1996]. > > Isn't what you've called here "multithreading" more typically called "shared > memory multithreading" or something like that?
The threads that exist within a single process share memory by definition. The historical perspective is as follows: * The first computers did not have an OS and ran one program at a time. * The first operating systems were capable to run multiple processes, but all these processes consisted of a single thread. * The concepts of mutual exclusion and semaphores were already described by Per Brinch Hansen in his paper "A comparison of two synchronizing concepts" (Acta Informatica, 1972). * The monitor concept was introduced by C.A.R. Hoare in his publication titled "Monitors: An Operating System Structuring Concept" (Communications of the ACM, October 1974). * The oldest publication I could find in which the thread concept was mentioned dates from 1986: "Mach: A New Kernel Foundation For UNIX Development" by Accetta et al. (USENIX 1986). > Nice write-up, BTW. Thanks :-) Bart. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Valgrind-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers
