Content deleted Content added
Line 37:
::> [P3L] constructs can be hierarchically composed to express, in a structured way, more complex forms of parallel computation. The P3L constructs are the only means that a programmer has to give parallel structure to an application. We have been supported in our choice by the evolution of sequential programming languages. In fact, '''a look at the history of imperative languages shows the progressive discarding of elementary constructs, e.g. gotos, in favour of a set of constructs with definite control flow behaviour, e.g. while, if, for, etc.'''
::Of particular note here is that all of these authors are proposing and/or evaluating language constructs (including control flow constructs) that enable reasoning about the structure of a concurrent programs, and they make analogies to the "structured programming" movement of the 1970s, including the trouble with GOTO. This is the same analogy that Smith makes in his 2018 blog post, and Smith's solution is—like the cited authors—to employ control flow constructs to model concurrent tasks.
:: There is also [https://jacobfilipp.com/DrDobbs/articles/DDJ/2009/0911/0911ec01/0911ec01.html this 2009 blog post] from Herb Sutter, where he uses the phrase '''"unstructured concurrency"''' and also makes an analogy to GOTO.
::Anyway, that's all of the time I'm willing to spend exploring this topic. Perhaps a future editor can integrate some of these resources into a new revision of the page. [[Special:Contributions/157.211.234.44|157.211.234.44]] ([[User talk:157.211.234.44|talk]]) 06:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
| |||