Re. March IEEE Computer Diatribe on Java

[phw <P.H.Welch@xxxxxxxxx>]

Paul/Dyke,

> From paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tue Apr  8 02:37:06 1997
> To: occam-com@xxxxxxxxx
> From: Paul Walker <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: March IEEE Computer Diatribe on Java
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> 
> My copy of IEEE Computer arrived yesterday, and the only interesting
> article was Ted Lewis's diatribe on Java, where he showed a simple
> double-buffer/FIFO giving a race hazard resulting in mostly working and
> intermittent failure.
> 
> Which seems to be exactly what your class library overcomes.
> 
> Worth a letter to the editor or short follow-up article?

and:

> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 10:53:19 -0600
> From: dyke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Dyke Stiles)
> Subject: Re: March IEEE Computer Diatribe on Java
> To: occam-com@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> That was the same reaction I had!!  There seems to be a lack of
> appreciation over here of what is being/has been done over there -
> an article in Computer would be great.

OK!  Paul -- would you bring a copy of this article to Twente next week?
Let's pen a reply during the meeting ... something along the lines:

  o why are we getting into this mess in 1997 when everything to do with
    things like race hazards on double-buffer FIFOs was *completely*
    sorted out 20 years ago (CSP etc.).  The problem is that Java threads
    are defined in terms of Tony Hoare's earlier idea of monitors.  Result
    is that Java (in this area) is based on technology from the late 1960s
    and it hurts ...

  o there is a wealth of literature and industrial practice on doing this
    properly, but it's being forgotten ...

  o the occam (dare we mention that) and CSP community looked at this in the
    context of Java one year ago.  A workshop was run last September that
    sorted out these issues -- see results on the web.  Follow-up conference
    with tutorials happening NOW -- buy the book!

Is that too aggressive?

Cheers,

Peter.