On 10/23/07, Peter William Lount <peter@smalltalk.org> wrote:
  

Of course one could also implement a copy-on-write-bit for objects in
the "read-only-shared-top-level-object-space-of-the-image". In order to
accomplish any work a process must be forked! Also, this way any process
that forks off will need to copy all of the objects it modifies into
it's own private object-space until the process commits it's changes
into the top level object-space or until it aborts.
    

Once again I have no idea what you're talking about.  I guess you're
not responding to me with this, since the system I'm talking about
would not commit any changes back to a top level process.

  

Concurrency isn't like automatic garbage collection - which is actually
quite broad and complex a field - at all.
    

*sigh*.  Ok, if you're going to respond to things I say, please read
what I write.  Speed reading obviously isn't working.  I said message
passing is *ANALOGOUS*.

analogous

adjective
1. 	similar or equivalent in some respects though otherwise
dissimilar; "brains and computers are often considered analogous";
"salmon roe is marketed as analogous to caviar"

Manual memory management is hard to do and does not scale or compose
well as explained in the email I originally linked to.

Shared state fine grained locking is hard to do and does not scale or
compose well as explained in the email I originally linked to.