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

*To*: <occam-com@xxxxxxxxx>*Subject*: Re: OO&CSP*From*: ianeast <ianeast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Mon, 11 Feb 02 19:51:54 +0000

>1) Dynamic object interactions: the need for dynamic alphabets and channel >passing: pi&pict vav csp&occam >2) splitting the csp atom: opening up event atomicity in going from >specification to implementation >3) Meta-csp: modeling imperative implementations using the visibility of >ready sets and manipulating the fdr firing rules >4) MAXCHICKENS=3: Why do humans need to set the limits in CSP models, are >there cases where FDR could work it out for a given subset of proofs? >(Can you see that it is the tension between mathematical cleaness and ease >of commercial applicability that is most interesting to me) >5) How about Milner's bigraphs etc How about process inheritance? Ian Dr. Ian Robert East ireast@xxxxxxxxxxxxx School for Computing and Mathematical Sciences Oxford Brookes University Wheatley Campus Oxford OX33 1HX Consultation hours for Academic Year 2001/2 Term 2 Wed 09.00..11.00; 14.00..16.00

- Prev by Date:
**Re: OO&CSP** - Next by Date:
**Re: OO&CSP** - Previous by thread:
**Re: OO&CSP** - Next by thread:
**Process Inheritance and Reuse. Event inheritance too?** - Index(es):