[e-lang] Quick comments needed on tgc draft
markm at cs.jhu.edu
Sat Jun 18 14:23:38 EDT 2005
David Hopwood wrote:
>> Each procedure call places a new frame
>> on the top of the stack, and the frames are processed from top
>> to bottom. In a message-passing system, each frame corresponds
>> to a message (arrow) and its target (dot).
> Terminology issue: do we count systems with multicast or other
> multiple-target messaging primitives as message-passing systems, or
> is single-target implied unless otherwise specified?
I would count them as message passing. Joule's Channels are multicast, and I'd
certainly count Joule as a message passing system. But I doubt this
distinction is relevant within the scope of this paper.
> I also don't much like the SH/AM/XL names. It would be slightly better if
> a different (say sans-serif) font were used to indicate names of entities,
> maybe including vats.
I was thinking of using a font distinction (such as LaTeX typewriter) more
consistently for all programming-language text, such as variable names. But I
was specifically avoiding doing so for object names, since they are the
paper's god's-eye designation of the objects involved, as distinct from the
program variables used to hold references which designate objects. Perhaps
LaTeX equation font ("$...$") would be good for object names?
Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain
More information about the e-lang