4 ms·
I agree it is odd to say that something is running concurrently but with out concurrency. The problem is threads and locks and what not are well known as concu
by stonemetal 12y ago
I agree it is odd to say that something is running concurrently but with out concurrency. The problem is threads and locks and what not are well known as concurrency primitives, programming with them known as concurrent programming, etc. So what do we call concurrent programming that doesn't make use of any of the concurrency primitives, concurrent programming techniques? We want to call it something but we don't want to co-opt current nomenclature. Parallel isn't "taken" and does an OK job of expressing what they are doing.
- taeric 12y agoI would have thought something like "independent" or "n-agent" would have caught on. Though, I'm fine with some ambiguity, to be honest. And I am not at all "in the field." My point is really that it is a lost cause to try and use such an outside common word to have a specific meaning.