Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch > #17973 > unrolled thread

The Contract Model In Computer Architecture

Back to article view | Back to comp.arch

Contents

  The Contract Model In Computer Architecture seimarao@gmail.com - 2013-09-09 11:22 -0700
    Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2013-09-10 09:19 -0700
      Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture seimarao@gmail.com - 2013-09-11 18:19 -0700
        Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com> - 2013-09-12 19:19 +0200
        Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2013-09-12 23:47 -0700
          Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2013-09-22 07:56 -0700
            Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2013-09-22 12:54 -0700
              Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2013-09-23 00:02 -0700
              Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com> - 2013-09-23 21:00 +0200
            Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2013-09-22 19:19 -0400
    Re: The Contract Model In Computer Architecture MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2013-09-21 19:11 -0700

#17973 — The Contract Model In Computer Architecture

Hi,

    Can the Contract Model create a new class of Architectures?

    Wasnt it the model of Sun which went into Java but not into HW?

Sincerely,
Seima Rao.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#18000

On 9/9/13 11:22 AM, seimarao@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
>      Can the Contract Model create a new class of Architectures?
>
>      Wasnt it the model of Sun which went into Java but not into HW?

comp.arch is a discussion forum not a help forum.
People may help but no one is obliged to help you.
If you want to discuss things, you need to provide
some context. What led you to ask these questions,
what research (or web search) have you done to
try to find answers, etc. And you questions have
to make sense (which they don't. To me). What do
you mean by "the model of Sun"? And which Java
do you mean?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18025

>you need to provide some context. What led you to ask these questions, 
>what research (or web search) have you done to try to find answers, 

Hi,
 
    I indeed did some research but dropped out thinking these are Sun(Oracle)'s
    patents.

    The context is stated below:

    Consider Java Generics or for that matter .Net compilation.

    Both utilize something called Dynamic Compilation where the same
    set of instructions are utilized to execute different requirements.

    While Generics are a bad example, the basic idea which I caught on
    to was Hey, they are using dynamic compilation where only 1 image
    exists. So, this means that a procedure sits somewhere inorder to
    execute different types of code. Given Sparc's Register Windows
    and its excessive bias towards procedural code, Design By Contract
    could arguably equalize Sun with others.

    The thinking that I forgot to remember :-) was to lay the path
     between say, Lisp's Car & Lisp's Cat so there would be 1 image
    executing on a Register Windows Machine that is Sparc.

    I admit there exists a lapse but hidden patents rarely encourage 
    anyone to meditate excessively on such directions.

Sincerely,
Seima Rao.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18033

seimarao@gmail.com writes:

>>you need to provide some context. What led you to ask these questions, 
>>what research (or web search) have you done to try to find answers, 
>
> Hi,
>  
>     I indeed did some research but dropped out thinking these are Sun(Oracle)'s
>     patents.
>
>     The context is stated below:
>
>     Consider Java Generics or for that matter .Net compilation.
>
>     Both utilize something called Dynamic Compilation where the same
>     set of instructions are utilized to execute different requirements.
>
>     While Generics are a bad example, the basic idea which I caught on
>     to was Hey, they are using dynamic compilation where only 1 image
>     exists. So, this means that a procedure sits somewhere inorder to
>     execute different types of code. Given Sparc's Register Windows
>     and its excessive bias towards procedural code, Design By Contract
>     could arguably equalize Sun with others.
>
>     The thinking that I forgot to remember :-) was to lay the path
>      between say, Lisp's Car & Lisp's Cat so there would be 1 image
>     executing on a Register Windows Machine that is Sparc.
>
>     I admit there exists a lapse but hidden patents rarely encourage 
>     anyone to meditate excessively on such directions.

Nope... still does not make sense (to me, at least).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18036

On 9/11/13 6:19 PM, seimarao@gmail.com wrote:
>> you need to provide some context. What led you to ask these questions,
>> what research (or web search) have you done to try to find answers,
>
> Hi,
>
>      I indeed did some research but dropped out thinking these are Sun(Oracle)'s
>      patents.
>
>      The context is stated below:
>
>      Consider Java Generics or for that matter .Net compilation.
>
>      Both utilize something called Dynamic Compilation where the same
>      set of instructions are utilized to execute different requirements.
>
>      While Generics are a bad example, the basic idea which I caught on
>      to was Hey, they are using dynamic compilation where only 1 image
>      exists. So, this means that a procedure sits somewhere inorder to
>      execute different types of code. Given Sparc's Register Windows
>      and its excessive bias towards procedural code, Design By Contract
>      could arguably equalize Sun with others.
>
>      The thinking that I forgot to remember :-) was to lay the path
>       between say, Lisp's Car & Lisp's Cat so there would be 1 image
>      executing on a Register Windows Machine that is Sparc.
>
>      I admit there exists a lapse but hidden patents rarely encourage
>      anyone to meditate excessively on such directions.

Many of the phrases you are using make sense separately but
not when they are used together like this!

Are you a student or studying all this on your own? Anyway,
comp.arch is not the right place for you. Suggest you find a
local teacher who can help untangle your confusion. Just
focus on learning to program using a programming language
your teacher or mentor is comfortable with.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18083

On Friday, September 13, 2013 9:47:46 AM UTC+3, Bakul Shah wrote:
> 
> Are you a student or studying all this on your own?

Sounds more like EE research project attempting to undertake Turing test

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18084

On Sunday, September 22, 2013 5:56:58 PM UTC+3, Michael S wrote:
> On Friday, September 13, 2013 9:47:46 AM UTC+3, Bakul Shah wrote:
> 
> > 
> 
> > Are you a student or studying all this on your own?
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds more like EE research project attempting to undertake Turing test

Oops, Of course I meant to say *AI* research project

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18088

On 9/22/13 12:54 PM, Michael S wrote:
> On Sunday, September 22, 2013 5:56:58 PM UTC+3, Michael S wrote:
>> On Friday, September 13, 2013 9:47:46 AM UTC+3, Bakul Shah wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Are you a student or studying all this on your own?
>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds more like EE research project attempting to undertake Turing test
>
> Oops, Of course I meant to say *AI* research project

Didn't pass my Turing test. But it could be a Madlib project
considering its word salad nature.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18091

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

> On Sunday, September 22, 2013 5:56:58 PM UTC+3, Michael S wrote:
>> On Friday, September 13, 2013 9:47:46 AM UTC+3, Bakul Shah wrote:
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > Are you a student or studying all this on your own?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sounds more like EE research project attempting to undertake Turing test
>
> Oops, Of course I meant to say *AI* research project

Possibly an EE trying to do an AI project?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18087

Michael S wrote:
> 
> Sounds more like EE research project attempting to undertake Turing test

SCIgen is MIT's contribution in this area,
which the Wikipedia article says has as many
as 85 papers currently published by IEEE Xplore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCIgen

generates scientific nonsense like

"Many physicists would agree that, had it not been for congestion
control, the evaluation of web browsers might never have occurred.
In fact, few hackers worldwide would disagree with the essential
unification of voice-over-IP and public/private key pair.
In order to solve this riddle, we confirm that SMPs can be
made stochastic, cacheable, and interposable."

Eric

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18080

On Monday, September 9, 2013 1:22:02 PM UTC-5, seim...@gmail.com wrote:

>     Can the Contract Model create a new class of Architectures?

Can it create a new one--no that one already existed--it is an indirect
architecture, much like running 1401 codes on an IBM 360. You have one
machine create an environment that simulates or emulates the other machine's 
environments sufficiently well to fool any well written program.

All you are adding with the JAVA <crap> is a layer of indirection provided
by a compiler.

Mitch

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.arch

csiph-web