From: Erich <john@peppermind.com>
Subject: Re: Concurrency always is non-deterministic?
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 02:05:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: 2012-02-14T02:05:51-08:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0dbc36f5-15f6-4b47-808c-d19d5ac72cba@x19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 6f19eaa9-c75f-4fca-86d4-bfaee2f51db7@k40g2000yqf.googlegroups.com
On Feb 14, 2:18 am, Phil Clayton <phil.clay...@lineone.net> wrote:
> functional programming is unsuitable for systems
> that are any of: real-time, embedded or critical
The first two points, yes, but what about the third. Haven't
functional programming languages like Haskell been used for critical
(high-integrity) applications as a substitute for Ada/Spark, because
they make formal verification very easy?
I'm not claiming it, just believe I've read about it and ask as a
layman out of curiosity.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-14 10:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-13 17:41 Concurrency always is non-deterministic? Long Hoàng Đình
2012-02-13 18:04 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2012-02-13 19:38 ` Simon Wright
2012-02-13 19:56 ` Bill Findlay
2012-02-14 1:13 ` Simon Wright
2012-02-14 11:29 ` John B. Matthews
2012-02-14 2:34 ` Phil Clayton
2012-02-13 18:06 ` Georg Bauhaus
2012-02-13 19:11 ` Niklas Holsti
2012-02-13 22:10 ` Brian Drummond
2012-02-14 2:18 ` Phil Clayton
2012-02-14 10:05 ` Erich [this message]
2012-02-14 15:00 ` Phil Clayton
2012-02-14 18:23 ` Jeffrey Carter
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox