[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: JCSP - Initial Questions

Hi Larry, Neil,

Sorry Neil, I lost your message, but I agree with the quote beneath.
Reader and writer is better. Yes, I compiled something in Occam-pi with
KRoC if I remember well. Syntax is not very intuitive IMHO. ;-)

And to repeat my other post: "That channel endpoints are separate
entities is indeed useful. They are in other Java libraries modelled as
InputPipe and OutputPipe (JXTA), as SourceChannel and SinkChannel
(java.nio.channels), as Puttable and Takable (java.util.concurrent)."

Kind regards,


On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 08:25 -0800, tjoccam@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi Neil and Anne,
> I know I'm a bit late, and maybe this is so obvious it's not worth
> mentioning, but...
> >> * The nomenclature of channel.in() and channel.out() is confusing.
> >> Channel.out() should be the endpoint of the channel, not the output of
> >> the component where a channel starts. If a channel is a first-class
> >> entity, it should be treated like that.
> >>
> > I know Peter (one of the authors) is aware of this confusion.  We think
> > in a process-oriented manner, hence out() is from the perspective of the
> > process.  reader() and writer() would have been better - and may yet be
> > used in future.
> The entire JCSP project is process-oriented primarily; the Java parts are
> there because of the necessity of running it over Java. Therefore to
> understand its "spirit" it would make sense to study a pure
> process-oriented language, e.g. occam - "occam 2 Reference Manual", Inmos,
> 1988 is a quick study, only 133 p long, including lots of intuitive
> examples. The relation to JCSP entities will be obvious.
> Larry Dickson