From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,292c095d622af1d0
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.125.201 with SMTP id ms9mr6835354pbb.3.1337191431650;
        Wed, 16 May 2012 11:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 pr3ni6059pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!news.internetdienste.de!news.tu-darmstadt.de!news.belwue.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:03:50 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: basic question on Ada tasks and running on different cores
References: <jo59po$s06$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jo7u2o$c7c$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <30585369.219.1336470732142.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynbq3>
 <jodnse$c29$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jof8lf$adu$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <johu2d$9vj$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <4facce09$0$9502$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <jp0hpq$8gm$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In-Reply-To: <jp0hpq$8gm$1@speranza.aioe.org>
Message-ID: <4fb3ec06$0$9505$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2012 20:03:50 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: a3dd5853.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=KelY\>aa1UUV;Ef1`Jk54\ic==]BZ:af^4Fo<]lROoRQnkgeX?EC@@P8WEnDiKGIRRnc\616M64>ZLh>_cHTX3j]o_ldbAU39?X
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-05-16T20:03:50+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 16.05.12 17:40, NatarovVI wrote:
>> Do they address predictability of I/O, both local and communicating,  in
>> reactive systems?
> 
> again - "parallelism is not concurrency"
> 
> parallelism is not about predictability, it's about computational 
> efficiency. fast way to get some correct result.
> it can be implemented via concurrency, hard way.
> but exist other ways also.

What other way that is also efficient?

> programmer writes dependencies, runtime schedules it automatically.
> SISAL. NESL. this way.

OK. I have ranted about this in the other post. Sorry.