From: BDH on
I am enthusiastic over humanity's extraordinary and sometimes very
timely ingenuities. If you are in a shipwreck and all the boats are
gone, a piano top buoyant enough to keep you afloat may come along and
make a fortuitous life preserver. This is not to say, though, that the
best way to design a life preserver is in the form of a piano top. I
think we are clinging to a great many piano tops in accepting
yesterday's fortuitous contrivings as constituting the only means for
solving a given problem.â?¨- R. Buckminster Fuller

From: BDH on
> >[...] Let's put our code in objects because...I don't
> >know, some guy thinks without justification that it will make X easier!
>
> Shirley, you're not serious.

Maybe I'm biased - I hate Java.

When people see things as beautiful, â?¨ugliness is created. â?¨When
people see things as good, â?¨evil is created.
-Tao Te Ching

From: BDH on
So how do you build and move to a boat while sitting on a piano top?
Welllll, first we assume a sufficiently smart corporation, then we
assume a sufficiently smart compiler, then we assume sufficiently smart
developers...

From: Andrew Reilly on
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 21:27:06 -0800, BDH wrote:

> So how do you build and move to a boat while sitting on a piano top?
> Welllll, first we assume a sufficiently smart corporation, then we
> assume a sufficiently smart compiler, then we assume sufficiently smart
> developers...

How are the developers, however smart, going to express their algorithms
without introducing sequential dependencies, however inadvertently?
(What is an algorithm, without sequential dependencies?) Don't you need an
appropriate language, and perhaps a plausible parallel machine
abstraction, before you start on the compiler? How would your language be
different from Verilog or VHDL or Occam? What would be different, this
time?

Or are you, perhaps, hinting at the "High Productivity" DARPA project, or
one of Sun, IBM or Cray's sub-projects, each of which, I assume, has
working answers to my previous questions?

Cheers,

--
Andrew
From: Richard on
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

"BDH" <bhauth(a)gmail.com> spake the secret code
<1162438715.331466.142640(a)h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> thusly:

>> >[...] Let's put our code in objects because...I don't
>> >know, some guy thinks without justification that it will make X easier!
>>
>> Shirley, you're not serious.
>
>Maybe I'm biased - I hate Java.

That's like saying you think procedural programming sucks because you
hate Pascal.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>