Re: Intel: timely article

[tjoccam@xxxxxxxxxxx]

>
> On 10 Jul 2006, at 16:04, Barry Cook wrote:
>
>> Another article in the same issue - "Can  We Make Operating Systems
Reliable and Secure?" - (Tanenbaum et al) pp44-51 also makes
>> interesting reading (another familiar message). There is mention of
another language "Sing#" which "fully supports channels in the
>> language, including formal typing and protocol specifications". The
syntax even includes '?' and '!' !!!  Also implemented is data
>> owned by one process and ownership passed via channels. Again no
references to the proponents we know.
> Just a note to say that we may well have to tolerate the idea that
'they' (whoever it may be) thought of all of it first,

Where did '?' and '!' come from?

> <SNIP>
> IMHO, the only way to win is to build real software with tangible (ie
financial) advantage.  How can anyone read 3,000+ journals anyway! Truth
is no-one does.  I don't think writing anything but salable software
will effect change.

I agree, but would extend that to hardware. Mike Patrick, an old
Transputer colleague of mine, says very powerful hardware has become
surprisingly cheap to develop ($xx,xxx not $x,xxx,xxx) using cores.

Paul, are you still in the hardware business? I have an invention I would
very much like to develop, and it would open a ready door to
process-oriented code as its native language. I tried to email you
earlier, but had an old address, I guess.

Larry Dickson

>
> Perhaps aiming at the right people and trying harder to solve _their_
problems might work better. In my humble experience, getting a modest
contract has actually been easier than getting a grant, or a paper in an
RAE-listed journal, for that matter.  Pays better too.
>
> Ian
>
>
>