Hello,

More about Channels, Concurrency and lightweight tasks and more..

I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..

I am posting this last post, since i have to talk more about other subjects:

I think i am smart and i am like a software architect, and i am
an inventor of many software scalable algorithms and algorithms, so
i will continu to explain more:

From a software architecting point of view, i think that Go programming language from Google has made some big software architecting errors, for example you can take a look at the architecting of channels in Go
programming language from the source code and you will notice that the mutex of the channels is spinning about 1 ms or 2 ms, and it is not good, since it is not so efficient, since it is by analogy like when you have to prevent too much cache-coherence traffic by using queue locks, i mean that the mutex of the channels in Go language is spinning for 1 ms or 2 ms and it is not good since it makes the thing slow, since thread switching is slow and it is also not like convoy resistant, and it is not the only disadvantage, i will talk about the other disadvantages of Go and more in my next book about parallel programming and concurrency that i will sell, so i think that Go and Rust languages are not so efficient, read all my following thoughts so
that to understand more:

I have just looked quickly at the following video of Concurrency and Channels and lightweight tasks, and i invite you to look
at it:

Andy Wingo - Channels, Concurrency, and Cores: A new Concurrent ML implementation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IcI6sl5oBc

I think i am smart and i think that the above solution
in the above video has the same problem as Go language with channels and light goroutines from Google, since i have looked at Go and is using mutexes in its implementation of Channels that
are not so efficient, so the problem is that it is by logical analogy
like the problem of a "monopolization" that is not so business friendly,
since we can think that the others can still invent queues or locks or mutexes that are much more efficient, so how can they sell it "advantageously" to people around the world if Google or other compagnies are monopolizing with there Go language and such. So i think that this types of Concurrency with lightweight tasks and with channels that is included directly inside a language has its disadvantage that it becomes a not business friendly.

More of my philosophy about the new Rust language and about CSP(Communicating sequential processes) and more..

I think i am smart, and i will say that the new programming language that we call Rust is not so efficient, since the problem
is that it is using Rust compiler that comes with a race detector that is NP-hard or NP-complete, so it is not efficient at all in term of time complexity and it also means that Rust compiler will never know in race detection which of races are real race conditions(Read here in the following paper so that to understand it: https://www.sjsu.edu/people/robert.chun/courses/cs159/s3/Y.pdf, and, this is the reason why it is also difficult to use a tool to find race conditions accurately, C++
has the same problem as Rust, so the best way is to use Channels and processes like in superpascal or Channels and "lightweight" tasks like goroutines in Go so that to avoid race conditions and such parallel programming bugs like in the following example of Go that shows how to avoid race conditions:

https://fodor.org/blog/go-avoiding-race-conditions/

And i think that Go and Rust have another disadvantage and here it is:

More of my philosophy about the too much purism philosophy of Rust and more...

I think i am smart, and i think that Rust compiler and language is too much "purist", it looks like the too much purism of Haskell functional programming language, since i say that Rust and Go don't provide us with OOP inheritance, but it is too much restrictive, and it is the deficiency of Rust, since inheritance has advantages and disadvantages, so we have to balance well and provide also with inheritance so that to be efficient, so i think that C++ and C# are better than Rust in this regard, and here is the advantages and disadvantages of OOP inheritance:

https://www.ianswer4u.com/2017/09/oops-inheritance-advantages.html

As a software developer you have to become more efficient and productive. So you need to make sure the code you write is easily reusable and maintainable. And, among other things, this is what inheritance gives you - the ability to reuse without reinventing the wheel, as well as the ability to easily maintain your base object without having to perform maintenance on all similar objects.

More of my philosophy about Superpascal and about CSP(Communicating sequential processes) and more..

I think i am smart, and i am also programming in Object Pascal
of Delphi and Freepascal, and i think i am also a smart "Wirthian" programmer of the Wirthian familly of ALGOL-like languages, since i have programmed in Pascal and i have also programmed in Superpascal(You can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperPascal), and
i have programmed in Object Pascal of Delphi and Freepascal, and i know more about Superpascal, that was an interesting enhancement of the pascal language, that brought an enhancement in a form of a "Forall" statement that is like a Parallel For loop, and that brought an
enhancement in a form of "Channels" that look like Go channels and that permit to code parallel programs, so the Superpascal channels allowed us to program like in CSP(Communicating sequential processes) that is a formal language for describing patterns of interaction in concurrent systems. And CSP(Communicating sequential processes) is a member of the family of mathematical theories of concurrency known as process algebras, or process calculi, based on message passing via channels, so Superpascal Channels allowed us to avoid parallel bugs such as race conditions, but i think that those channels can also be used in a more simple way like in the following article, so that they permit to avoid race conditions and that's also i think a much better enhancement, so read the following article so that to know about the more simple way of using Go channels or Superpascal channels so that to avoid race conditions:

https://fodor.org/blog/go-avoiding-race-conditions/

And so that you get an idea about Superpascal, you can look
at its source code in Freepascal here in Gitub:

https://github.com/octonion/superpascal

So as you notice that Superpascal programming language, that was invented in year 1993, has preceded Go programming language by providing Channels etc.. that permit to do parallel programming by avoiding race conditions and such parallel programming bugs.

But you have to know that i am smart and i have also enhanced
Object Pascal of Freepascal and Delphi by inventing the following
Threadpool that scales well and that supports parallel for loop,
you can read about it carefully here in my websites:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well

And i have also enhanced Object Pascal of Freepascal and Delphi by
inventing a Scalable reference counting with efficient support for weak references, you can take a look carefully about it here in my websites:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-reference-counting-with-efficient-support-for-weak-references

So as you notice that i am also an inventor of many scalable algorithms
and algorithms..

More of my philosophy about stack memory allocations and about preemptive and non-preemptive timesharing..

I think i am smart, and as you are noticing in my below thoughts that
i am abstracting smartly so that to make you understand preemptive and non-preemptive timesharing , other than that i will also give you
an interesting Stack memory allocation algorithm in Delphi and Freepascal so that to use it smartly with my below sophisticated Stackful coroutines Library, so i will extend my sophisticated Stackful coroutines Library so that to support it smartly, and here it is:

--

var pool: array [1..limit] of integer;
memory: array [min..max] of integer;
top: integer;

procedure initialize;

var index: integer;

begin
for index := 1 to limit do
pool[index] := empty;
top := min − 1
end;

procedure allocate( index, length: integer; var address: integer);

begin

address := pool[index];
if address <> empty then
pool[index] := memory[address]
else
begin
address := top + 1;
top := top + length;
if not (top <= max)
then raise Exception.Create('Stack overflow..')

end
end;

procedure release( index, address: integer);
begin
memory[address] := pool[index];
pool[index] := address
end;

--

More of my philosophy about about the paper and about preemptive and non-preemptive timesharing and more..

I have just forgotten to post about who has written the following
paper about cooperative and preemptive tasking:

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman90_HeavyweightTasking.pdf

Here is the Professor Phil Koopman of Carnegie Mellon University from Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering who has written
this paper:

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/personal.html

And note that i am calling, in my thoughts below, cooperative and preemptive tasking: "preemptive and non-preemptive timesharing"

On 2/12/21 09:30, Amine Moulay Ramdane wrote:
> [racist incoherent drivel snipped]
Just yesterday you told us that you had posted your final message. Yet
here you are again, like a lingering bad smell. This just proves that
you are a liar as well as a narcissistic fool.

For everyone else, nntp injection host is 173.178.84.155, abuse reports
to abuse@videotron.ca. His other spamming account, World-News2100, is
injected via eternal-september so abuse@eternal-september.org should
suffice there.

Oh, do please shut up, teeny troll.

Noel Duffy <uaigh@icloud.com> writes:
> On 2/12/21 09:30, Amine Moulay Ramdane wrote:
>> [racist incoherent drivel snipped]
> Just yesterday you told us that you had posted your final message. Yet
> here you are again,
[...]

This person has been posting stuff like this to multiple newsgroups for
many years, including repeated broken promises not to post again. He
has never responded to requests to stop, and never will. Posting
followups merely adds to the noise level.

Update your killfile or other filter and ignore him.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

On 3/12/21 08:49, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Noel Duffy <uaigh@icloud.com> writes:
>> On 2/12/21 09:30, Amine Moulay Ramdane wrote:
>>> [racist incoherent drivel snipped]
>> Just yesterday you told us that you had posted your final message. Yet
>> here you are again,
> [...]
>
> This person has been posting stuff like this to multiple newsgroups for
> many years, including repeated broken promises not to post again. He
> has never responded to requests to stop, and never will. Posting
> followups merely adds to the noise level.
>
> Update your killfile or other filter and ignore him.
>
Ignoring this monomaniac won't work. If you want to see the damage he
does if allowed to infect a group, take a look at groups like
comp.lang.c++. Yes, he's even posting his poetry. Many people these days
only interact with Usenet through Google Groups and when they see this
sort of drivel, well, it only accelerates the death of Usenet.

I don't expect a response from Aminer, but regular abuse reports are the
only effective medicine against this disease.

Noel Duffy <uaigh@icloud.com> writes:
> On 3/12/21 08:49, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Noel Duffy <uaigh@icloud.com> writes:
>>> On 2/12/21 09:30, Amine Moulay Ramdane wrote:
>>>> [racist incoherent drivel snipped]
>>> Just yesterday you told us that you had posted your final message. Yet
>>> here you are again,
>> [...]
>> This person has been posting stuff like this to multiple newsgroups
>> for
>> many years, including repeated broken promises not to post again. He
>> has never responded to requests to stop, and never will. Posting
>> followups merely adds to the noise level.
>> Update your killfile or other filter and ignore him.
>>
> Ignoring this monomaniac won't work.

It works perfectly well for me; I don't see his posts.

Replying to him certainly won't work, and does more harm than good.

By all means report his abuse to anyone who might be able to cut him off
at the source, but please don't post your abuse complaints *to the
newsgroups he's abusing*.

My purpose in this post is to encourage people not to reply publicly to
his posts. I know he won't stop.

And I'm going to stop talking about this now.

[...]

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */