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

Groups > comp.programming.threads > #4255

We have to be smart and get on more precision by using logic and measure..

Show key headers only | View raw

Hello,

We have to be smart and get on more precision by using logic and measure..

You have seen me writing my previous post, but with more precision i 
have to define more what i mean by "general" purpose, so like in 
philosophy, if we are like rationalism, we will neglect empiricism,
this is the main point also, so we have to know how to be rationalism
and also empiricism, and this is inherent to my definition of what
is general purpose, for example when i say Lockfree algorithms are not
general purpose , first, i mean that the  understanding of the mechanism 
constrain the definition of general purpose by meaning
that general purpose is general purpose of what is "Lockfree",
so we have not to think the "set" as being not constrained by
the definition of Lockfree, so when i say that Lockfree algorithms
are not general purpose , i mean since there is bigger disadvantages of 
Lockfree algorithms, so we can not call them general purpose, and this
apply to compilers or interpreters, if we notice that they come with
bigger noticable disadvantages , so we can start to call them as not
being general purpose, this is my meaning and definition of general 
purpose, so this is why you are noticing that we are today learning
many programming languages, because we are understanding the 
disadvantages of this or that programming languages, and this
makes us understand that this bigger "complexity" of learning many 
programming languages and tools etc. is like returning back to
the complexity of programming assembler, so now you are capable of 
understanding my previous post, here it is:

About computer programming..

Since we are not capable of designing a compiler or interpreter or the 
like that are more suitable for everything in programming, i mean that 
are general purpose, and since for example Lockfree algorithms are not 
general because they have there advantages and disadvantages etc. so 
computer programming today is like returning back more to assembler, i 
mean it is like returning back to much more "complexity", for example 
you have to be "aware" of the "inside" of Lockfree algorithms to be able 
to say that Lockfree algorithms are faster than Lock based algorithms 
when there is more and more context switches between threads that uses 
the Lockfree algorithms, and by understanding them you have to be 
capable of applying them to reality more efficiently because they are 
not like general purpose, So now you are understanding my main point, 
this is why i wrote before that:

Here is the main very important point in computer programming:

I think the main point is that you have not to think to work with just 
Java or with just Lockfree algorithms and not Lock based algorithms, now 
you are able to see my point of view that Java or Lockfree algorithms 
are not "general" purpose, so you have to start to enlarge your 
conception of our world and be more diversified in computer programming 
, this is what we call responsability today.


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

First

Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

We have to be smart and get on more precision by using logic and measure.. Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com> - 2018-05-04 01:55 -0400

csiph-web