Hacker News Reader

Comment by wcsun | Hacker News Reader

Considering GC and concurrency issues, this talk is good for people making language choices on the JVM. In the end, he said he personally thinks STM is not a good way to program concurrency. And, I think immutable data is good for GC.

View on HN

http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/...

(orig. post deleted):

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/6l7cb/clojure_s...

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163552.aspx

Or look at how STM is handled in Haskell, where it's arguably more pure.

http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/4070

(the optimistic vs. rollbacks distinction

http://liyang.hu/pub-model.xhtml

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/daqho/is_transa...

FWIW, why .NET can't have it:

http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/4069

I went to the version of this talk he gave at Java Symposium; his argument was that it can work for Clojure, where immutability and functional purity resolve some of the problems. Perhaps these discussions moved his position slightly.

Or maybe he just learned Clojure people are pedantic and it's more time efficient to agree rather than argue with them.

Apparently Project Fénix https://fenix-ashes.ist.utl.pt/ at the Instituto Superior Técnico in Lisbon somewhat changed his mind about STM last May: http://www.azulsystems.com/blog/cliff/2010-06-04-or-how-i-go...

SPJ's take on Microsoft STM attempt: http://www.mail-archive.com/haskell-cafe@haskell.org/msg7973...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com