The fact that senders in Linda needn't know anything about receivers and vice versa is central to the language.

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

• The fact that senders in Linda needn’t know anything about receivers and vice versa is central to the language. It promotes what we call an uncoupled programming style.quote0.945
  Concise statement of Linda's key design philosophy.
• Communication and process creation are two facets of the same operation in Linda.claim0.780
  Linda unifies process creation and communication through generative communication.
• The Linda code is insensitive to the number of clients, whereas Parlog requires a merge process that depends on the count.claim0.767
  Demonstrates flexibility advantage.
• Linda wins the freedom to coexist peacefully with any number of base languages and computing models.concept0.754
  Load-bearing statement on Linda's orthogonal design principle: it doesn't meddle in computation, only coordination.
• Linda is a simpler, more powerful and more elegant model than any of these four alternatives (message-passing, concurrent objects, logic languages, functional).claim0.751
  The central thesis of the paper, stated explicitly in the introduction.
• In Linda, no separate merge process is needed for multiple client streams.claim0.747
  Linda's tuple space allows many-to-one communication without an extra merger.
• Linda can express fine-grained wavefront computations cleanly; future implementations on next-generation machines can support them efficiently.hypothesis0.741
• Linda achieves scalable performance on distributed-memory machines.claim0.738
  Supported by reported speedup through 64 nodes on iPSC/2.