Object-oriented programming is powerful and attractive, but irrelevant to parallelism.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• Object-oriented concepts are irrelevant to solving parallel programming challenges.claim0.882
  Strong assertion that the enthusiasm for 'concurrent object-oriented programming' is misplaced; objects do not inherently help with parallelism.
• Object-oriented design is orthogonal to parallelism; 'objects' themselves do not help with parallel programming.claim0.871
  Concurrent object systems reduce to message-passing or monitors; objects solve code organization, not concurrency coordination.
• Concurrent object oriented programming has little or no meaning; it strikes us as more of a marketing than a technical term.claim0.818
  Strong assertion that OOP does not inherently address parallelism.
• The strengths of all three models (concurrent OOP, logic, functional) are irrelevant to parallelism, and generally unhelpful in dealing with process creation and coordination.claim0.817
  Assertion that the popular models add nothing to parallel programming.
• Parallel programming needn't be terribly difficult, but 'thinking in simultaneities' as in message-passing is calculated to make it difficult.claim0.802
  Asserts that Linda's uncoupled style reduces cognitive load.
• Pure functional languages cannot be the whole story for parallel programming because they fail to provide needed expressivity.claim0.792
  Argument that recursion equations are inappropriate for many important parallel programs.
• Object Oriented Programmingframework0.790
• Concurrent Object-Oriented Programmingframework0.785
  A major competing approach to parallel programming based on instantiating objects with embedded active processes and monitors for synchronization.