Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
A query about the new entry on copncurrency theory: Does ‘simultaneously’ make sense if there is no global clock?
If not, then the situation gets a lot more like some models for spacetime and the idea of slices through some evolving state space might be a good model.
Bob Harper has a blog post
where he explains a bit how to think of this conceptually…
… and in particular it seems that he suggests that your entry concurrency should instead be titled parallelism. But I’ll leave that to the experts.
In german (Duden) “simultan” can mean just “joint” without any reference to time . In english (Oxford Dictionaries) however the relation to time seems to be stronger. Curiously Duden gives another etymology: simul (latin)->similar which the Oxford Dictionaries do not know.
I did not read that blog post, but since “parallels do not interact” and concurrent processes perhaps do, the statement in the blog’s title seems to be plausible - but I do not see why this implies that the article should be named “parallelism”.
The sentence in question was mainly inspired by wikipedia and was just a side remark for me; so
But I’ll leave that to the experts.
holds for me, too.
1 to 3 of 3