- cmsg cancel <o21noa$k7u$2@dont-email.me> - 10 Updates
- I correct, read again... - 1 Update
- The essence of concurrency - 1 Update
- The essence of the essence.. - 1 Update
- The essence of parallel programming - 1 Update
- Look at this Relacy Race Detector - 1 Update
- My previous invention forces you to use.... - 1 Update
- Read again... - 2 Updates
- Here is my new and scalable and composable and more efficient invention that solves the problem of race conditions - 1 Update
- Here is the essence of real programming - 2 Updates
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 07:38PM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 07:45PM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 11:36PM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 11:44PM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 05 12:51AM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 05 01:36AM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 05 02:38AM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 05 03:35AM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 05 04:23AM +0100 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 05 04:26AM +0100 |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 10:27PM -0500 Hello...................... The essence of concurrency I think Java and ADA and C++ and those kind of languages that uses object oriented programming have failed miserably.. Because parallel programming has made them to fail, because they are too risky for parallel programming and thus for safe-criticalsystems.. Now read carefully this: The Downfall of Imperative Programming https://www.fpcomplete.com/blog/2012/04/the-downfall-of-imperative-programming As you will notice this person is not telling you that functional programming with Haskel and MVars is prone to Deadlocks and to Stavation , other than that functional programming introduces a problem with readability even if you use defun to simplify lisp programs etc. because functional programming doesn't force you to make functional programming more readable, so this problems of readability and Deadlocks and Starvation have made functional programming to fail also. So i think that we have a big problem now. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 10:24PM -0500 Hello.... The essence of concurrency I think Java and ADA and C++ and those kind of languages that uses object oriented programming have failed miserably.. Because parallel programming has made them to fail, because they are too risky for parallel programming and thus for safe-criticalsystems.. Now read carefully this: The Downfall of Imperative Programming https://www.fpcomplete.com/blog/2012/04/the-downfall-of-imperative-programming As you will notice this person is not telling you that functional programming with Haskel and MVars is prone to Deadlocks and to Stavation , other than that functional programming introduces a problem with readability even if you use defun to simplify lisp programs etc. so this problems of readability and Deadlocks and Starvation have made functional programming to fail also. So i think that we have a big problem now. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 09:36PM -0500 Hello.... The essence of the essence.. It's a good subject of philosophy.. But how to attack this subject ? The what first: The essence of the essence is a view that enhance our understanding.. The how in second: The tools of the essence of the essence is the tool also of philosophy: intelligence and logic and measure and money. Because a consequence of the essence of the essence is a higher degree of quality,but the essence of quality is a consequence of more money and more intelligence both cultural and genetical. And the essence of the essence is also a consequence of the essence of science that in turn is consequence of the essence of quality. So as you have seen me doing is using the essence of science to understand more the essence of reality, and that's why i have attacked philosophical subjects such as the essence of quality and the essence of science and the essence of programming and the essence of parallel programming. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 08:41PM -0500 Hello.... The essence of parallel programming Now i want to attack a problem about the essence of parallel programming I have understood more programming in Functional programming like programming in Scheme, Lisp and Haskel.. and i have programmed with C++ and Java and Object Pascal and Javascript and Perl. Now what is the essence of parallel programming ? You can not speak about the essence without speaking about the empirical facts that constrain parallel programming.. Now if you look at the functional programming Haskel, it tries to eliminate race conditions by using pure functions and Mvars, but it still is prone to Deadlocks and to Starvation and to the following form of logical problem: Look at this Relacy Race Detector: http://www.1024cores.net/home/relacy-race-detector Other that look at this: a:=a+1 If every thread has to increment "a" one time, this form of logic is nasty, because if we do the following in Relacy Race Detector: tmp:=a lock.enter; a:=tmp+1; lock.leave; How can Relacy Race Detector detect that the logic that every thread has to increment "a" one time is good ? Relacy Race Detector can not do it, and this form of logic can become more nasty, so this is why parallel programming for safe-critical systems is still too risky. Other than that modeling with contracts and with Relacy Race Detector is prone to error, so i think that since the essence of parallel programming is contrained by all those limitations, i think parallel programming is still too risky for safe-critical systems. So i will ask you also a question: Do you think that modeling with contracts with ADA or Eiffel is sufficient? i don't think so, because it lesser the probability of failing , but it still can fail, so contracts or Functional programming is not the silver bullet. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 07:38PM -0500 Hello.... Look at this Relacy Race Detector: http://www.1024cores.net/home/relacy-race-detector It is designed to detect race conditions, but you have to understand me Sir and Madam, you have to model your problem with this tool, and this modeling is prone to error, so that's not good for safe-critical systems, other that look at this: a:=a+1 If every thread has to increment "a" one time, this form of logic is nasty, because if we do the follwing in Relacy Race Detector: tmp:=a lock.enter; a:=tmp+1; lock.leave; How can Relacy Race Detector detect that the logic that every thread has to increment "a" one time is good ? Relacy Race Detector can not do it, and this form of logic can become more nasty, so this is why parallel programming for safe-critical systems is still too risky. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 06:52PM -0500 Hello, My previous invention forces you to use mechanism that look like a scalable reader-writer lock, so the remaining is to ensure that the write correspond to a pop from the writer queue, and a read correspond to a pop of the reader queue. But there is still a problem.. Because look at this: a := a + 1; If it is not protected with a lock , it will not work in parallel programming, this form of logic can be more nasty and is really a problem because safe-critical systems doesn't tolerate this level of risk, so race conditions are a difficult problem for security in safe critical systems. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 01:47PM -0500 Hello....... Here is the essence of real programming I have asked myself the question: Is programming a science ? I think real programming uses mathematics, such as: discrete mathematics, mathematical logic, and mathematics that help you to calculate the big O space and time complexity of algorithms, other than that real programming enhance more programming with more smart technics, and it uses and reuses intelligence in the form of smart code etc.. so programming by incremental steps and refinement can attain a higher degree of quality and so thus by approximation we can call this real programming science. Because by definition: what is science ? Science is called science because it uses intelligence to attain a higher degree of quality. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 05:50PM -0500 Hello.. Here is my new and more efficient invention that is scalable and that is composable and that solves the problem of race conditions in imperative and object oriented languages. About C++ or ADA or Java etc. and my following enhancement to them... C++ or ADA or Java etc. must add properties that you can access only from the constructor and can not be accessed from the methods of the object. This way you will be able to implement more cleanly my following new invention: First you have to call a constructor that will put a number of times the same global shared variables or all the properties of the object as pointers for example in there respective FIFO thread-safe queues, many times because this will scale well for the reader and this is for the reader side, and for the writer side you have to put only one pointer to the global shared variable or the property. And now you have to synchronize like a scalable reader-writer lock the two queues, one for the readers and one for the writer with locks, so if you grap the pointer of a property from the readers queue, the writer queue must contain one item, but if the writer queue doesn't contain an item the readers will block and wait, and if there is an item in the writer queue and there is no item in the readers queue, so the reader will block and wait, and if the writer grap the pointer of a property from the writer queue , the other writers will block and wait. This way you will solve the problem of race conditions efficiently for imperative and object oriented programming, and this solution is composable, because you can put all the properties of the object this way on there respective reader and writer queues. For Deadlocks use this: Use Lock Hierarchies to Avoid Deadlock http://www.drdobbs.com/parallel/use-lock-hierarchies-to-avoid-deadlock/204801163 Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 05:42PM -0500 Hello....... Here is my new and scalable and composable and more efficient invention that solves the problem of race conditions Here is my new and more efficient invention that scale well and that is composable and that solves the problem of race conditions in imperative and object oriented languages. About C++ or ADA or Java etc. and my following enhancement to it... C++ or ADA or Java etc. must add properties that you can access only from the constructor and can not be accessed from the methods of the object. This way you will be able to implement more cleanly my following new invention: First you have to call a constructor that will put a number of times the same global shared variables or all the properties of the object as pointers for example in there respective FIFO thread-safe queues, many times because this will scale well for the reader and this is for the reader side, and for the writer side you have to put only one pointer to the global shared variable or the property. And now you have to synchronize like a scalable reader-writer lock the two queues, one for the readers and one for the writer with locks, so if you grap the pointer of a property from the readers queue, the writer queue must contain one item, but if the writer queue doesn't contain an item the readers will block and wait, and if there is an item in the writer queue and there is no item in the readers queue, so the reader will block and wait, and if the writer grap the pointer of a property from the writer queue , the other writers will block and wait. This way you will solve the problem of race conditions efficiently for imperative and object oriented programming, and this solution is composable, because you can put all the properties of the object this way on there respective reader and writer queues. For Deadlocks use this: Use Lock Hierarchies to Avoid Deadlock http://www.drdobbs.com/parallel/use-lock-hierarchies-to-avoid-deadlock/204801163 Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 01:39PM -0500 Hello, Here is the essence of real programming I have asked myself the question: Is programming a science ? I think real programming uses mathematics, such as: discrete mathematics, mathematical logic, and mathematics that help you to calculate the big O space and time complexity of algorithms, other than that real programming enhance more programming with more smart technics, and it reuses intelligence in the form of smart code etc. so programming by incremental steps and refinement can attain a higher degree of quality and so thus by approximation we can call this real programming science. Because by definition: what is science ? Science is called science because it uses intelligence to attain a higher degree of quality. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Drazen Kacar <dave@fly.srk.fer.hr>: Dec 04 07:47PM Ramine wrote: > Because by definition: what is science ? > Science is called science because it uses intelligence to > attain a higher degree of quality. No. Science is something that uses scientific method. Which depends more on honesty than on intelligence. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.programming.threads+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment