From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Static variables?
Date: 1997/03/25
Date: 1997-03-25T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1997Mar25.073604.1@eisner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 5h8786$oml$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au
In article <5h8786$oml$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>, ok@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
> One of the things that has me bewildered and worried is the growing number
> of concurrent languages _without_ nested subprograms. Java is an obvious
> example. Another recent example is Limbo. The Limbo IPC mechanism is
> tranmitting messages over named typed channels. All processes run in the
> same address space. There are no nested procedures. Presto no-chango:
> it is the _programmer's_ job to ensure that variables are not operated on
> in multiple threads. Ada looks better and better every day.
Is the quality being sought just nested subprograms,
or is uplevel addressing actually required ? There
are languages which have nested subprograms without
uplevel addressing.
I suppose one can simulate uplevel addressing with lots of
in-out parameters, but for me that moves away from readability.
Larry Kilgallen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1997-03-25 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1997-03-17 0:00 Static variables? Viqar Abbasi
1997-03-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-03-18 0:00 ` nasser
1997-03-18 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-03-18 0:00 ` Samuel Tardieu
1997-03-18 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1997-03-19 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-03-25 0:00 ` Richard A. O'Keefe
1997-03-25 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen [this message]
1997-03-27 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox