claim

active

claim:parallel-programming-needn-t-be-terribly-difficult-but-thinking-in-simultaneities-as-in-message-passing-is-calculated-to-make-it-difficult

Parallel programming needn't be terribly difficult, but 'thinking in simultaneities' as in message-passing is calculated to make it difficult.

Asserts that Linda's uncoupled style reduces cognitive load.

Source paper

extracted_from

Linda in context

(1989) · Carrier, Nicholas · Gelernter, David

Neighborhood — ranked by edge-count

Artifacts (1)

artifact

Linda in Context (1989)
about
The source article that introduces and argues for the Linda parallel programming model, comparing it to message-passing, concurrent objects, logic programming, and functional programming.

Related by similarity (8)

cosine ≥ 0.65 · no typed edge

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

Pure functional languages cannot be the whole story for parallel programming because they fail to provide needed expressivity.claim0.830
Argument that recursion equations are inappropriate for many important parallel programs.
Explicitly parallel programs are not inherently harder to design or understand than functional specifications.claim0.820
C-Linda DNA comparison is comparable in length and clarity to Crystal; pragmatic runtime granularity control outweighs compiler optimization ideals.
In parallel programming, asynchronous communication is far more common than synchronous.claim0.814
Basis for preferring Linda's out (asynchronous) to remote procedure calls.
Object-oriented concepts are irrelevant to solving parallel programming challenges.claim0.810
Strong assertion that the enthusiasm for 'concurrent object-oriented programming' is misplaced; objects do not inherently help with parallelism.
Achieving automatic parallelization comparable to programmer-controlled granularity is a difficult problem.claim0.808
Scepticism about compilers fully automating granularity decisions.
Object-oriented programming is powerful and attractive, but irrelevant to parallelism.claim0.802
Claim that OOP per se does not solve any parallel programming problems.
Parallel sub-tasks within skills and across skill families should produce parallel outputs for legibility.claim0.798
"It is certainly very hard, and perhaps impossible, for mere humans to anticipate and rule out in advance all the disastrous ways the machine could choose to achieve a specified objective."quote0.783
Russell's statement opening Section 2 articulating the core motivation for the Contemplative AI approach