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.