<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi,<br>
<br>
Jason Johnson wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:aa22f0200710251204x2fe306e2qc0ef9ad6dc3caf23@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 10/25/07, Peter William Lount <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:peter@smalltalk.org"><peter@smalltalk.org></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> What are they?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Here. Again. <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://sixtyk.blogspot.com/2007/05/threading.html">http://sixtyk.blogspot.com/2007/05/threading.html</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks for the link. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:aa22f0200710251204x2fe306e2qc0ef9ad6dc3caf23@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> Sure, one only has to search the internet for "concurrency" and one sees a
wide range of problems and potential solutions. Look at the Little Book of
Semaphores for a breathtaking look at a few of the many possible solutions
to various problems. Open your eyes to the wider horizon.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Open my eyes to the wider horizon of yesterday? I've seen it. It's
complicated. I prefer to look at tomorrow.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well you might create a simpler tomorrow or SOME PROBLEMS but not for
many real world problems.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:aa22f0200710251204x2fe306e2qc0ef9ad6dc3caf23@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> I never said you stated that explicitly - I'd have to check all your
postings to find that out. It's implied by what you are saying in many of
your postings. At least that is the impression that I'm getting from your
writing. You've certainly not acknowledged the opposite.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I really believe that over-all your intentions are good, but this
seems downright dishonest. Either that are you simply don't read what
I write. I have told you *every single time* you brought up this
charge that I don't think it will solve all cases.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well I don't recall that, and it's hard enough keeping up with this
thread and the other stuff going on. It just seems that you and some of
the others are ignoring some of the more complex real problems with
simplistic solutions. As Einstein said, simple but not simplistic. In
terms of deep copy that means yes by all means a full deep copy is
needed but to avoid being simplistic a partial deep copy with or
without references is also required. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:aa22f0200710251204x2fe306e2qc0ef9ad6dc3caf23@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Ok, we're getting no where with this. I apologized to the list for
what this thread has turned into, and I'll try to do a better job
staying out of this sort of pointless "nu uh", "uh hu!", "nu uh!"
discussions in the future. (if I start it again just warn me! It's a
bit of a weakness of mine).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think this has been a very good discussion. It's uncovered some
interesting ideas that are out there. It's also shown that the wider
Smalltalk group is getting ready - maybe - to accept some of the
transaction processing notions that I've been supporting for over
fifteen years now. <br>
<br>
Keep up the good work Jason.<br>
<br>
All the best,<br>
<br>
peter<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>