Software Transactional Memory: Yay, Ney or Someday?
return42.blogspot.com
Software Transactional Memory: Yay, Ney or Someday?
1–4 of 4 posts
Re: Software Transactional Memory: Yay, Ney or Someday?
#2Re: Software Transactional Memory: Yay, Ney or Someday?
#3But anyway, people are very resistant to change in the computer programming community. New technologies == having to learn something new, and that's apparently a bad thing. (Look at how many people still hate automatic garbage collection, even though it's generally faster than manual memory management. It's scary and new, so let's run away!)
Re: Software Transactional Memory: Yay, Ney or Someday?
#4dons' comment is pretty much spot on. Will STM work for langauges like Java? Probably not. Does it work for languages like Haskell? Yes. But anyway, people are very resistant to change in the computer programming community. New technologies == having to learn something new, and that's apparently a bad thing. (Look at how many people still hate automatic garbage collection, even though it's generally faster than manua…
There's a good interview with two guys from the tech team on Channel 9: http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/Software-Transacti...
Worth watching if you're interested in the topic. They discuss some of the issues raised in the Enfranchised Mind post, and what they're doing about them. There are some other interesting tidbits about how STM and concurrency primitives can interact confusingly, and the way they're hooking things like SQL Server into the STM machinery so that other things besides pure shared memory access can get the benefits of atomic transactions.