I should expand upon my comment. Anyone who claims that, "I will argue further that moving to a signal-based, synchronous software model will not only result in

I should expand upon my comment. Anyone who claims that, "I will argue further that moving to a signal-based, synchronous software model will not only result in an improvement of several orders of magnitude in productivity, but also in programs that are guaranteed free of defects, regardless of their complexity" is not to be taken seriously. Anyone who is really interested in this model of computation would be far better off reading this: http://jpaulmorrison.com/fbp/ http://jpaulmorrison.com/fbp/ At least J. Paul Morrison doesn't claim that his approach is infallible. Indeed he goes to some length to point out the troublesome areas and techniques to address them. The author of the OP, Louis Savain, has some other strange ideas also: http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfruit/2008/01/laugh_along_with_louis_savain.php http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfruit/2008/01/laugh_along_wi...