Re: Mutex's, sheesh

["Jamie Riden" <jamesr () europe com>]

On 27/09/06, mikeiscool <michaelslists () gmail com> wrote:

> ...preparing to get flamed...
[no flames here...]
> how does a language care about how many computers it runs on? it
> doesn't. a program does. or multithreaded-ness. again the language
> doesn't care, it's api or programs or vm does.

Some languages and environments have been designed with concurrency in
mind and some haven't. If you're using something like mutexes in C,
it's very hard to do it right, where as Java has a somewhat more
friendly implementation of locking. Occam was designed from the ground
up for parallel implementation, so I believe it's even nicer, though
it's been a while since I played with it.

The thought of trying to optimise Visual Basic for tens of processors
makes the eyes water.

> and what do you mean 'optimise by programmer hours'? that's what is
> done already, mostly. and that's what causes problems ...

In most - depending on where you work - projects, programmer time
costs more than the hardware you're running on. Therefore, you want to
worry about your major costs before your minor ones. I know people who
write MPI stuff on a 100+ node cluster, and they probably have the
opposite issue.

cheers,
 Jamie
-- 
Jamie Riden, CISSP / jamesr () europe com / jamie.riden () gmail com
NZ Honeynet project - http://www.nz-honeynet.org/
_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave