Revision as of 19:01, 31 July 2013 edit 129.55.200.20 (talk) Note a concern about the accuracy of an overhead statement. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 21:24, 9 January 2015 edit undo Qwertyus (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 31,640 edits →Removed the software pipeline example: new section Next edit →
Line 79: After describing shared memory and message passing styles, the article states "Typically (although not always), the ... overhead ... is lower in a message passing system". ?!? Shared memory systems are generally much faster than message-passing systems because the former can bypass data copy, serialization, etc. Was this a typo? If it was intentional, some justification should be given. [[Special:Contributions/129.55.200.20\|129.55.200.20]] ([[User talk:129.55.200.20\|talk]]) 19:01, 31 July 2013 (UTC) == Removed the software pipeline example == I removed the software pipeline example, because I'm not convinced it's an example of concurrency. The present article is doing its best to distinguish concurrency from parallelism (even though [http://talks.golang.org/2012/waza.slide Pike], cited for the confusion between the two, actually connects them), and citing an obviously sequential algorithm (lex, parse, translate, assemble, link) isn't helping that cause. [[User:Qwertyus\|Q<small>VVERTYVS</small>]] <small>([[User talk:Qwertyus\|hm?]])</small> 21:24, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Concurrent computing: Difference between revisions