> > Well, of course, the design goals of Java are not up to me.
> > I do think that the current state of the art in languages based
> > on Java that disallow data races would arguably be difficult
> > to teach, and definitely too restrictive for a class of programming
> > techniques that are desirable in Java. Miles's I/O example is
> > one of these restrictions; I would also be surprised if Chandra's
> > system could express everything in util.concurrent with ease.
> I think Ownership types shows promise. Specifically, it looks like it may
> be teachable. (It sounds like Miles is already adding similar annotations
> to his programs in the form of comments.) If so, I think it is a very
> compelling feature, and worth compromising some flexibility and performance
> in order to accomodate. (Just as flexibility and performance were lost when
> "void *" was removed.)
> I don't see how you can say "definitely too restrictive". Maybe I'm missing
> Oh, well. Time will tell.
I just meant now. I didn't mean forever. I didn't even mean a week from
now. I like ownership types, I really do, I just don't think what they
have right this second in terms of freedom is quite enough.
I probably came across a bit reactionary there, I suppose. Sorry about
JavaMemoryModel mailing list - http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:00:42 EDT