On 10/23/07, Sebastian Sastre ssastre@seaswork.com wrote:
But that will introduce a singularity in the paradigm. I'm afraid that accept that is too much. Can you find a way of archieve the goal of your proposal without devastating the "all is an object" premise?
Where is it broken?
And accepting singularities like that is how a language gets it's syntax polluted and developers has to compensate that uncompletism by having to remember (and model) in it's brains N more rules. The worst of course is not the syntax but damaging the paradigm. That's is accepting the policy of unloading of work the machines to load humans. As I see things humans are not here for that and machines are not here for that. Dear Jason, I'm in the "opposite corner of the ring" for that policy.
Huh? I'm not talking about adding new syntax, I'm talking about using the (afaik) unused ! binary operator for sending messages.
Mmmm no. I mean that every message send should have a process ala Erlang. Of course this will only optimize in the other cores the messages sends that are parallelizable (discern on which is a question that deserves cogitation). Maybe is just a modest improvement to take advantage of multicore but it never has any intention to disrupt the paradigm.
Your ideas are interesting, but I'm a quite incremental builder. Add one little thing after the other and see how far we get.