[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       sqlite-users
Subject:    Re: [sqlite] Problems making sqlite.lib using Embarcadero C++ 7.00
From:       Dominique Devienne <ddevienne () gmail ! com>
Date:       2015-10-28 4:37:12
Message-ID: CAFCRh-_VL759mt1fWp+Or4nkjf3zWBut9STueP9ZXh9Ar6iVGQ () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 11:05 PM, James K. Lowden <jklowden@schemamania.org>
wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 12:24:03 +0100 Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>
> wrote:
> > > You've solved the problem by compiling for a
> single-threaded environment.
> > No; the single-threaded environment is the problem.
>
> That's a matter of opinion.  Another way to look at it: threads set
> back computing by 20 years.
>
> Protected memory was invented for good reason.  Then it was uninvented,
> and we're still dealing with the fallout.  Software transactional
> memory has so far failed to pass muster, and communicating sequential
> processes has still not seen implementation support in most languages.


Most languages, true. But one (new'ish) language, Go [1],
embraced CSP from the get go [2].

This talk [3] by Rob Pike, one of the three fathers of Go,
featured on the front page [1] discusses specifically Go's CSP
implementation.
It goes hand-in-hand with this other "classical" Go talk [4]: Concurrency
Is Not Parallelism.

[1] https://golang.org/
[2] https://blog.golang.org/share-memory-by-communicating
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6kdp27TYZs
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN_DpYBzKso
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]