X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Envelope-From:	paubert AT iram DOT es
Date:	Wed, 8 Jul 2015 09:20:21 +0200
From:	"Gabriel Paubert (paubert AT iram DOT es) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	"Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
Message-ID:	<20150708072021.GB13243@visitor2.iram.es>
References:	<20150706200609 DOT GD24178 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<CAC4O8c9f0pLsLu_dyuO5ggh7RmHY1vAA=UUhk9AE0JYZb4mhBQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhQfPO31-1Uyc3kC7w286r0VD7c41UZEZcyYquzknCxbsQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20150707060409 DOT GB14357 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<CAOP4iL2C_LU=RQy5FWYF-7RrHW6tqhqqyFJGjkwLQ2AD7FiYJA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1436287952 DOT 678 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<559C0F7E DOT 7010009 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<1436295556 DOT 678 DOT 91 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<CAOuGh89C71vTW00QLQgVBAQy=m6Me8khjqep=eFH7KgKGqaSzw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<559C3778 DOT 4000105 AT neurotica DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<559C3778.4000105@neurotica.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Spamina-Bogosity:	Unsure
X-Spamina-Spam-Score:	-0.2 (/)
X-Spamina-Spam-Report:	Content analysis details: (-0.2 points)
	pts rule name description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
	0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
	See
	http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
	for more information.
	[URIs: neurotica.com]
	0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
	[score: 0.4968]
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 04:32:56PM -0400, Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> On 07/07/2015 03:50 PM, Bob Paddock (graceindustries AT gmail DOT com) [via
> geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> > "Parallel processing,
> > concurrency, threading is an very important point in these days"
> > 
> > To add other obscure languages to this thread (I have heard of all of
> > them except Crystal, need to look that one up).
> > 
> > Erlang, that does parallel processing without threads.
> > Erlang's designer saw threads as evil and went with message passing.
> > Read Joe Armstrong's thesis.
> > Never heard of Erlang?  It runs a large part of the worlds phone network.
> 
>   Erlang looks fantastic, until you get to that
> nonintuitive-to-thepoint-of-incomprehensibility syntax!
> 
> > Functional Languages are the long term future rather than procedural
> > languages for maintainability and keeping out bugs.
> 
>   For the most part I'd have to agree...but they're always going to be
> slow, because functional language code (much like object-oriented code)
> generally doesn't map all that well to the way processors actually
> *work*. (unless you're running an iAPX-432, which I'm assuming you
> aren't! ;))
> 
>   Of course one could make "the Lisp argument": "Now that processors are
> faster, the performance problems people complained about years ago are
> irrelevant!" ;)

Yeah, and I find that the netlist generation of my current projects
(over 20 seconds) is already slow enough. I have the feeling that scheme
is part of the reason.

    Gabriel

- Raw text -