"Jason Johnson" <jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/23/07, Peter William Lount <peter at smalltalk.org> wrote:
<snip>
> > 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*.

Interestingly enough, there was a paper at OOPSLA titled "The transactional
memory/garbage collection analogy":


http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1297080&jmp=abstract&coll=portal&dl=ACM

(The URL requires an ACM subscription to read.)

The abstract reads:

    This essay presents remarkable similarities between transactional memory
and garbage collection. The
    connections are fascinating in their own right, and they let us better
understand one technology by
    thinking about the corresponding issues for the other.

frank