Fri Jun 7 21:15:27 CEST 2002
> |> I am becoming more and more convinced that Erlang should be judged
> |> as a concurrent language than as an FP langauge.
> A concurrent language like OCCAM????
I used to think little of OCCAM, because it didn't seem to be
designed for the things I expected from a programming language.
But with that background, I kept running into surprises when
talking to folks in our local concurrency group - they looked at
me as if they had no idea what language I might be complaining
about, until they finally realised: "oh, you mean _normal_ occam..".
Here's a relevant excerpt from their group projects page:
Occam has also been made considerably more flexible, enabling it to
be used way beyond its original target application area (embedded
systems). Extensions include user-defined operators, native thread
support, dynamic process loading, persistence and mobile processes -
a key research issue being to achieve all this without compromising
parallel security or efficiency.
Would be nice if new-Occam (or whatever they may call it) and Erlang
folks would know more about each other's work ;-)
PS. I guess they are talking about
Kent Retargetable occamTM Compiler (KRoC)
Both pages refer to a conference on "Communicating
Process Architectures" you might be interested in -
the reference on the KRoC page seems to be the recent one..
More information about the erlang-questions